Rother District Council Agenda Item: 6 Committee - Planning Date - 19 November 2009 Report of - Director of Services Subject - Planning Applications Planning Committee Procedures Planning Conditions, Reasons for Refusal and Notes Conditions, reasons for refusal and notes are primarily presented in coded number form within the report. The codes are set out in full in the Council’s Planning Conditions, Reasons for Refusal and Decisions Notice Notes Document. Background Papers These are planning applications, forms and plans as presented in the Agenda. Correspondence between the applicant, agents, consultees and other representatives in respect of the application. Previous planning applications and correspondence where relevant, reports to Committee, decision notices and appeal decisions which are specifically referred to in the reports. Planning applications can be viewed on the planning website www.planning.rother.gov.uk . Planning Committee Reports If you are viewing the electronic copy of the Planning Applications report to Planning Committee then you can access individual reported applications by clicking on the link (View application/correspondence ) at the end of each report. Consultations Relevant consultation replies which have been received after the report has been printed and before the Committee meeting will normally be reported orally in a summary form. 1
Transcript
Rother District Council Agenda Item: 6Committee - Planning
Date - 19 November 2009
Report of - Director of Services
Subject - Planning Applications
Planning Committee Procedures
Planning Conditions, Reasons for Refusal and NotesConditions, reasons for refusal and notes are primarily presented in coded number form within the report. The codes are set out in full in the Council’s Planning Conditions, Reasons for Refusal and Decisions Notice Notes Document.
Background PapersThese are planning applications, forms and plans as presented in the Agenda. Correspondence between the applicant, agents, consultees and other representatives in respect of the application. Previous planning applications and correspondence where relevant, reports to Committee, decision notices and appeal decisions which are specifically referred to in the reports. Planning applications can be viewed on the planning website www.planning.rother.gov.uk.
Planning Committee ReportsIf you are viewing the electronic copy of the Planning Applications report to Planning Committee then you can access individual reported applications by clicking on the link (View application/correspondence) at the end of each report.
ConsultationsRelevant consultation replies which have been received after the report has been printed and before the Committee meeting will normally be reported orally in a summary form.
Late Representations and Requests for DefermentAny representations and requests for deferment in respect of planning applications on the Planning Committee agenda must be received by the Head of Planning in writing by 9am on the Wednesday before the meeting at the latest. The Council will not entertain a request for deferment unless it is supported by a full statement containing valid reasons for the request.
Delegated ApplicationsIn certain circumstances the Planning Committee will indicate that it is only prepared to grant or refuse planning permission if, or unless certain amendments to a proposal are undertaken or subject to completion of outstanding consultations. In these circumstances the Head of Planning can be delegated authority to issue the decision of the Planning Committee once the requirements of the Committee have been satisfactorily complied with. A delegated decision does not mean that planning permission or refusal will automatically be issued. If there are consultation objections, difficulties, or negotiations are not satisfactorily concluded, then the
application will have to be reported back to the Planning Committee or reported via the internal only electronic Notified D system as a means of providing further information for elected Members. This delegation also allows the Head of Planning to negotiate and amend applications, conditions, reasons for refusal and notes commensurate with the instructions of the Committee. Any applications which are considered prior to the expiry of the consultation reply period are automatically delegated for a decision.
The Council does not allow the recording or photographing of its proceedings.
Order of PresentationThe report on planning applications is presented in the following order as shown below:-
1.5 Planning Policy Statement 7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.___________________________________________________________________
2.0 SITE
2.1The property is set on north side of St. Marys Lane behind a tall hedge and tree screen and 2m high access gates across the driveway. The site is located on the western fringe of Bexhill, but within the countryside to the west of the development boundary of Bexhill.
2.2The greater part of the site comprises an area of land which is not considered to form residential land.
2.3Two detached properties are set opposite the site and a large detached house is set to the north in its own grounds.
2.4Contained within the site is an extended two storey dwelling with attached garage, a small brick built outbuilding previously converted to ancillary residential accommodation, a timber stable building and a pole barn. Occupancy of the small annexe building is restricted by way of condition and Section 106 Legal Agreement.
3.1 RR/2009/911/P Conversion of outbuilding to form granny annexe including single storey extension to form living room and additional bedroom. Withdrawn.
3.2 RR/2006/1381/P Conversion of outbuilding to form granny annexe. Refused.
3.3 RR/2007/2349/P Conversion of outbuilding to form annexe. Approved___________________________________________________________________
4.0 PROPOSAL
4.1 The applicant seeks to construct a side extension forming a roundel on the eastern elevation of the single storey outbuilding and change the use of the extended building to holiday let accommodation.
5.1 Planning Notice: No representations received.___________________________________________________________________
6.0 APPRAISAL
6.1 The proposed design is similar to that submitted under RR/2009/911/P which was withdrawn due to the concerns raised regarding the introduction of a roundel as the proposed side extension.
6.2 In determining this application, I have taken into account the previously withdrawn application and the surrounding area and buildings to which the development would relate. I have been mindful of the adopted plan policies referenced in Section 1 of this report and the provisions of PPS 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development and PPS 7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.
2
6.3The small and well proportioned former out building is visible from both the highway and adjoining land and the introduction of a roundel would have a visual impact upon the surrounding landscape.
6.4This latest submission forms two separate elements each with its own set of specific issues and each addressed in turn. Firstly, a proposed side extension on the eastern elevation in the form of a roundel with conical roof and secondly the change of use of the building for holiday let accommodation.
6.5While the proportions of the extension have been designed to resemble the small outbuilding, it appears the roundel has had its first floor omitted resulting in the conical roof simply dropped to a lower level in an attempt to try and make the development look like a converted oast house.
6.6No evidence has been submitted demonstrating consideration has been given to other possible designs and why they were discounted leaving the roundel as the only choice. Reference is made to the design in Section 10 of the supporting statement in that a roundel forms an ‘iconic feature of the Kent and Sussex countryside’. Ordinarily I would agree to this assertion, however, this specific proposal is to simply extend a small outbuilding with a small facsimile of a real roundel. A roundel must be two storeys high and then the conical roof and attached to a similarly large barn. Therefore a real oast house is substantially larger than the development shown and it is therefore architecturally and historically out of context with the rural setting. I therefore consider the scheme does not accord with adopted plan policies and cannot be supported. This is an essential element within government guidance and can be seen in Sections 33, 34 and 35 of Planning Policy Statement 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development.
6.7With regard to the second element of the application, the proposed change of use of the building from a residential annexe to self contained holiday let accommodation could be acceptable in principle. This could be effectively controlled through the imposition of restrictive conditions and a legal agreement. Moreover, the proposed reuse of the converted outbuilding could accord with Policies EM3 and EM9 contained within the Rother District Local Plan.
6.8The application has been submitted with a six page planning statement which includes an appraisal of policies contained within the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011. However it is important to clarify that the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan 1991-2011 is no longer in force following approval of The South East Plan and therefore its policies are no longer relevant and have not been referred to in this report.
6.9Personal circumstances have been cited for reasons for and in support of this application. Letter of support relating to the physical capabilities of the applicant have also been submitted as part of the application. However, I do not consider the personal circumstances are relevant in the determination of this particular scheme.
3
6.10 It has been noted from the site location plan that the red outline for the self contained holiday let accommodation extends into land which does not appear to benefit from a change of use from agriculture. As this does not form part of the application, the development has not been assessed on the change of use of the land.
7.1 The proposed side extension in the form of a roundel is, I consider, out of character with the small outbuilding to which it would directly relate. While the development may be set within a group of buildings, the mass bulk and scale of the resultant building would not be in keeping with the visual appearance of the area. Essentially the development is a new build converted oast house disproportionate in mass and scale to genuine oast houses and is therefore a building which would not be found in the countryside.
1. By reason of the proposed side extension forming a roundel, the resultant development would effectively introduce a poor facsimile of a genuine oast house (which consist of a barn and drying kiln roundel). The development would therefore be out of keeping with the rural setting as it is inconsistent with full scale oast houses found in the countryside. The development therefore conflicts with Policy GD1(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
2. It has not been demonstrated though alternative schemes set out in the design and access statement, that the proposed design is the most effective way of developing this small converted outbuilding for holiday let accommodation while preserving/enhancing the visual amenity of the rural setting. The development therefore conflicts with Policy GD1(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Case Officer: Mr M Cathcart (Tel: 01424 787613)(Email: [email protected])
Ward Member: Councillor P DouartCouncillor Mrs J Gadd
Reasons for Committee consideration: 1. Head of Planning2. Not in accordance with the Council’s delegation procedures
Statutory 8 week date: 30 November 2009 ___________________________________________________________________
This application is included in the list of site inspections.___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 The site is within the Development Boundary for Bexhill as identified in the Rother District Local Plan. Policies DS3 of the Plan states that the majority of all new development will take place within the development boundaries of existing settlements.
1.2 Policy HG4 sets out the principles that new housing development will be expected to demonstrate.
1.3 Policy GD1 sets out the general development criteria that all new development should meet.
2.1 The application site is on the fringe of Bexhill Town and is situated behind the ribbon of residential properties fronting the eastern side of Peartree Lane. The site (0.2 hectares) presently comprises two dwellings and the greater part of their gardens. Highwoods Golf Club is immediately to the rear of the site. The existing dwellings are served by a single access track to Peartree Lane. There are a number of oak trees (3) on the boundaries of the site.
3.1 There is no relevant planning history.___________________________________________________________________
4.0 PROPOSAL
4.1 The proposal is in outline only with all matters of detail reserved. It is proposed to demolish the two existing detached dwellings (a house and a bungalow) and construct seven 3 bedroom dwellings on the site. An indicative layout plan has been provided; this shows 7 no. detached dwellings with a total of 13 parking spaces and the construction of a spur road off the existing access track to serve four of the dwellings.
5.2 Director of Transport & Environment – Rights of Way: (summarised) – No objection to the application subject to access to the public footpath running adjacent to the application site being maintained at all times.
5.3 Environment Agency: Comments awaited.
5.4 Southern Water Services: (summarised) – Due to the current high workload we are unable to make substantive comments on this application. The proposed development appears to be low risk development; however, the applicants should check the site for the location of public sewerage and water supply apparatus, which should be protected.
5.5 Planning Notice: Emails/letters of objection have been received from 7 local residents and The Ramblers Association. Grounds of objection are summarised as follows:- The proposed development would not be in keeping with the surrounding
area. The density, scale and massing of the proposed development is
inappropriate There is a high population of badgers and other protected wildlife in the
area that would be affected by the development The narrow lane is unadopted and totally unsuitable for any increase in
traffic The lane is also a public footpath. Any additional vehicular activity would
risk the safety of walkers
7
Restrictive covenants may apply to the site Who will maintain the lane if extra traffic generated as a result of the
development damages the surface The noise generated as a result of the development would impact on
residential amenities of existing residents in the vicinity of the site Any heavy building work will exacerbate existing subsidence problems
which presently affect my property Access track is not wide enough to allow two vehicles to pass Access track is unsuitable to accommodate construction traffic The redevelopment would completely change the character of the area The mains drains and water supply to my bungalow and that of my
neighbours are inches below the surface of the access track and would undoubtedly be damaged
The access track floods during periods of heavy rainfall; the additional run-off from the development would exacerbate the problem
The increased traffic will expose walkers to a greater risk of accident unless a satisfactory footpath diversion or a safe pedestrian pavement is provided
6.1 The application site is located within the Development Boundary for Bexhill as identified in the Rother District Local Plan, and as such there is a presumption in favour of development, subject to its detail and compliance with other policy criteria. In this respect it is considered that the development would be inappropriate as it would conflict with policies contained in the Local Plan, particularly in the main areas of concern:
6.2 Highway issues 6.2.1 It is proposed that the new development would be served by the existing
access with Peartree Lane. This is an unmade track which is narrow in width (ranging between 2.6m – 3.1m) and would not allow two vehicles to pass. This access road is unsuitable to serve the traffic generated by the proposed additional number of dwellings.
6.3 Impact on the character of the area
6.3.1 Whilst the application is in outline only, an indicative layout plan has been provided. It is not considered, however, that this demonstrates that seven dwellings can be satisfactorily accommodated within the site without resulting in harm to the existing character and appearance of the area. The present character and appearance of the land is semi-rural. In particular, the proposed scheme would develop the site at a density that is higher than that of existing residential development in the locality. The resultant built development would not allow sufficient space within the site for any meaningful landscaping or new planting to soften its impact on the appearance of the area. Furthermore, it would place pressure on existing mature oak trees on the perimeters of the site and the application does not demonstrate that these are capable of being retained. The scheme would result in an urban form of development that would present a visually hard edge to the outer fringe of Bexhill in the vicinity
8
of the site that would be detrimental to the appearance and character of the area.
6.4 Parking provision
6.4.1 The indicative layout plan shows the provision of 13 individual parking spaces within the development. Your adopted standing would require 17 spaces. It has not been demonstrated that the proposed number of residential units can be satisfactorily accommodated within the site and also cater for practical needs in terms of parking for residents, visitors and deliveries and service vehicles (such as refuse/recycling).
7.1 The application is in outline only and all details of the development are reserved matters. Whilst the site is within the Development Boundary for Bexhill as indicated in the Rother District Local Plan, the application proposal conflicts with other policies set out the Plan. In particular, the access is unsuitable to serve the additional dwellings and furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that the density of development can be satisfactorily accommodated within the site without causing harm to the character and appearance of the area and also, with due regard to the practical need to provide sufficient parking and manoeuvring space for vehicles.
1. The access road is considered inadequate to serve the development by virtue of its restricted width, tortuous alignment and unmade surface. The proposed development therefore conflicts with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
2. It has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that the development can be accommodated on the site without resulting in harm to the semi-rural character and appearance of the area. In particular the quantum of built development would place pressure on existing trees and would not allow sufficient space for any degree of meaningful landscaping or new planting. The proposed development conflicts with Policy GD1(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. It has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that adequate on site parking and manoeuvring space can be provided for residents, visitors, deliveries and service vehicles. The development conflicts with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Planning Committee 19 November 2009___________________________________________________________________
RR/2009/2524/P RYE 26 Watchbell Street, The Garden House
Complete modernisation of a private dwelling, including first floor addition, new fenestration and internal partition reconfiguration. Proposal includes for widening of existing vehicular access from Watchbell Street. Works include solar panelling on south slope of new asymmetrical roof design and new first floor balcony on south elevation.
Case Officer: Edwin Corke(Tel: 01424 787609)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: RYE
Ward Member: Councillor S HolmesCouncillor D Russell
Reason for Committee consideration:Head of Planning: Significant local interest
Statutory 8 week date: 04 December 2009___________________________________________________________________
This application is included in the list of site inspections.___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 Policies GD1 and HG8 of the Rother District Local Plan, and Government advice contained in PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment apply in the determination of this application.
1.2 Policy GD1 of the Local Plan states that “All development should meet the following criteria:(i) it meets the needs of future occupiers, including providing appropriate
amenities and the provision of appropriate means of access for disabled users;
(ii) it is in keeping with and does not unreasonably harm the amenities of adjoining properties;
11
(iii) it provides for adequate and safe access by all relevant modes of transport, appropriate parking provision, in accordance with Policy TR3 and does not result in unacceptable traffic or transport conditions;
(iv) it respects and does not detract from the character and appearance of the locality; and
(viii) it does not prejudice the character, appearance or setting of heritage features, notably……..listed buildings, conservations areas.”
1.3 Policy HG8 of the Local Plan states that “Proposals to extend or alter an existing dwelling will be permitted where they are in keeping with the character of the existing dwelling and its surroundings in terms of its size, style, design and materials, as well as protecting the amenities of adjoining properties and meet other criteria in Policy GD1.”
1.4 Paragraph 2.12 of PPG15 states that “Authorities are required by section 66(1) of the Act, in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of architectural or historic interest which it possesses.”
1.5 Paragraph 4.14 of PPG15 states that “Section 72 of the Act requires that special attention shall be paid in the exercise of planning functions to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area.”
2.1 This application relates to part two-storey modernist dwellinghouse with integral garage that is set in a plot of 0.1 hectares on the south side of Watchbell Street. Unlike the majority of other properties in Watchbell Street, the building sits some 10m from the back of the footpath. The application site is situated within the Rye Conservation Area and is adjoined by three grade II listed buildings; 25 Watchbell Street to the west and 27 & 28 Watchbell Street to the east.
4.1 This is a revised application following the refusal of planning permission RR/2008/1978/P in August 2008 on design grounds.
4.2 The applicant now seeks permission to modernise the dwelling with alterations that include: erecting a ground/first floor addition to the side and above the garage at
the front of the building. This addition replicates the design of the existing asymmetrical roof;
erecting a timber entrance canopy to the side of the property; replacing existing windows and doors; inserting new windows and doors; erecting a balcony at the rear of the property; creating a small balcony above part of the garage to the side of the
property; updating the buildings external materials; installing two solar panels on the internal roof slope of the ground/first floor
addition; and widening the existing vehicular access.
The proposed alterations would not increase the height of the existing dwelling or bring it forward of its current position.
5.1 East Sussex County Council Archaeologist:- No recommendations.
5.2 Romney Marshes Area Internal Drainage Board:- No comments.
5.3 Planning Notice :- Rye Conservation Society – No objection subject to consideration of neighbouring properties amenities.
21 objections or general observations with the following comments (summarised): out of keeping with other buildings in Watchbell Street; existing property should not be altered; widening of existing access will restrict on-street parking; the original permission for the dwelling was subject to strict conditions to limit its visual impact. the building will become much more intrusive; adverse effect upon the amenities of neighbouring properties; overlooking; loss of views;
13
loss of light; potential for land slippage; unsympathetic and ugly design; loss of mature trees; potential for the boundary wall with 28 Watchbell Street to collapse; building works will have an adverse effect on the quiet residential street. if approved could the trees at the front of the site be retained; no idea that such a proposal could be considered in a Conservation Area; the planning applications of 2008 and 2009 have been traumatic; and neighbouring lives should have been taken into consideration.
6 letters of support (2 of which are from the applicant) in respect of the design approach.
6.1.1 This application relates to an existing modernist dwelling designed by Frederick MacManus OBE situated on a relatively large plot of land. It is considered that the proposed alterations are sympathetic to and would enhance the character and appearance of the existing dwelling. The contemporary approach adopted builds on the original design. As such, the proposed alterations would not harm the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or the setting of the adjoining listed buildings.
6.2 Effect upon the amenities of neighbouring properties
6.2.1 From the initial site inspection it appears that the proposed development would not unreasonably harm the amenities of adjoining properties, as it would not result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking or have a dominant and overbearing impact. Members will assess the impact on site.
Some neighbours have objected because the proposal would result in the loss of views, however, this is not a material planning consideration.
6.3 Widening of the existing vehicular access
6.3.1 The proposal to widen the existing vehicular access by some 400mm is considered to be acceptable, as it would not significantly alter the character and appearance of the street scene or result in a significant loss of on-street parking.
7.1 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable, as it would not harm the character and appearance of the existing dwelling, the character and
14
appearance of the Conservation Area, or the setting of the adjoining listed buildings. In addition, it would not unreasonably harm the amenities of adjoining properties or result in the significant loss of on-street parking.
7.2 I am awaiting additional plans showing the proposed east and south elevations but I am satisfied that the scheme is acceptable subject to appropriate conditions and site visits to the neighbouring properties.
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT (FULL PLANNING) DELEGATED (ADDITIONAL PLANS, EXPIRY OF CONSULTATION PERIOD)___________________________________________________________________
CONDITIONS
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.Reason: In accordance with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. No development shall take place until samples of all materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.Reason: To maintain the visual amenities of the surrounding area in accordance with Policy GD1 (iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. No development shall take place until details of all new window and door joinery, at a scale of 1:10 elevations with full size sections through cills, frames and opening lights, including glazing bars and mullions and showing the relationship to the existing structure, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and only those approved details shall be employed within the development and thereafter retained.Reason: To ensure an appropriate design for the dwelling and locality in accordance with Policies GD1 (iv) and HG8 of the Rother District Local Plan.
4. No development shall take place until details of the new entrance gates, at a scale of 1:10 elevations and showing the relationship to the existing brick wall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and only those approved details shall be employed within the development and thereafter retained.Reason: To ensure an appropriate design for the locality in accordance with Policy GD1 (iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
5. At the time of construction and prior to the first occupation or use of the extension hereby approved, the ensuite window at first floor level within the east elevation, as indicated on the approved drawing no. 02-02 Revision D date stamped 9 October 2009, shall be glazed with obscure glass of obscurity level equivalent to scale 5 on the Pilkington Glass Scale and shall thereafter be retained in that condition.Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining properties in accordance with policy GD1 (ii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
15
REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: The proposed development is considered to be acceptable, as it will not harm the character and appearance of the existing dwelling, the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, or the setting of the adjoining listed buildings. In addition, it would not unreasonably harm the amenities of adjoining properties or result in the significant loss of on-street parking. The proposal therefore complies with policies GD1 (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (viii) and HG8 of the Rother District Local Plan and Government advice contained in paragraphs 2.12 & 4.14 of PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment.
Planning Committee 19 November 2009___________________________________________________________________
RR/2009/1283/P NORTHIAM AHS Limited, Coppards Lane
Biomass combined heat and power plant; erection of new building to house CHP plant; installation of biomass combustion plant and associated Buer generation equipment
Case Officer: Mr Richard Wilson(Tel: 01424 787616)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: NORTHIAM
Ward Member: Councillor M MooneyCouncillor R Parren
Reason for Committee consideration:Head of Planning: Major application of considerable local significance
Statutory 13 week date: 10 September 2009___________________________________________________________________
This application is included in the list of site inspections.___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIESGovernment guidance
1.1 Planning Policy PPS22: Planning for Renewable Energy sets out the government’s objectives:
“The development of renewable energy, alongside improvements in energy efficiency and the development of combined heat and power, will make a vital contribution to these aims. The Government has already set a target to generate 10% of UK electricity from renewable energy sources by 2010. The White Paper set out the Government's aspiration to double that figure to 20% by 2020, and suggests that still more renewable energy will be needed beyond that date. The White Paper sets out policies to stimulate the development of new technologies to provide the basis for continuing growth of renewables in the longer term, to assist the UK renewables industry to become competitive in home and export markets and in doing so, provide employment.
Increased development of renewable energy resources is vital to facilitating the delivery of the Government's commitments on both climate change and renewable energy. Positive planning which facilitates renewable energy developments can contribute to all four elements of the Government's sustainable development strategy: ....”
1.1.1 The advice goes on to advise local authorities to set out criteria to be applied in assessing applications for renewable projects and discusses the balance between encouraging new projects and protecting local landscapes and conservation designations. Biomass projects are also addressed in terms of traffic generation. A Companion Guide to PPS22 has been produced to which reference is made below.
1.1.2 PPS7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas is also relevant and is referred to in more detail in section 6.2.3 below.
South East Plan1.2 The recently published South East Plan raises the profile of Combined Heat
and Power (CHP). In this respect the Plan includes the following:
“Policy NRM 12: COMBINED HEAT AND POWER
Local development documents and other policies should encourage the integration of combined heat and power (CHP), including mini and micro–CHP, in all developments and district heating infrastructure in large scale developments in mixed use. The use of biomass fuel should be investigated and promoted where possible.
Local authorities using their wider powers should promote awareness of the benefits of mini and micro-CHP in the existing build stock.
9.67 As well as encouraging the use of efficient design and layout and renewable energy technology in new development, this Plan encourages the use of combined heat and power (CHP) and district heating in new buildings. For the purposes of this guidance, district heating should be interpreted as including cooling, and that the term ‘cooling’ includes absorption cooling.
9.68 The Government has set a target for the installation of 10,000 MW of CHP generation by 2010. CHP and district heating systems use excess heat from electricity generation (including from renewable fuels) or industry to heat or cool buildings in the locality. Traditional CHP is highly fuel efficient (70-90% compared to 30-50% for conventional heating and electricity generation) and can result in savings in energy use and expenditure. Mini-CHP is applicable at a street scale or for large buildings, and micro-CHP is a replacement for conventional domestic boilers. This uses normally wasted heat to generate electricity. Every 1,000 MW of CHP capacity decreases carbon emissions in the range 0.48 – 0.95 million tonnes a year. CHP plants can be powered by a range of fuels and can vary in size.
19
9.69 CHP deployment will be most effective where the generation plant is relatively close to the users of the heat, where this includes a mix of uses to even out the pattern of demand for electricity and heat through the day and where the density and layout of development reduces costs of installation of the necessary infrastructure and distribution of heat.
9.70 There is scope, therefore, to encourage provision of CHP (preferably certified as ‘good quality’ under the CHP quality assurance scheme) in association with new and existing developments and, in particular, large scale regeneration or mixed use schemes. It may also have the potential for use in remote rural areas that do not have access to mains gas supplies.”
Further policies set out regional and sub-regional renewable energy targets.
Rother District Local Plan and the Local Development Framework1.3 The Local Plan contains no specific policies relating to renewable energy.
The Local Development Framework Core Strategy Consultation Strategy Directions makes reference to sustainable resource management and acknowledges some potential for biomass, and further work is to be undertaken on this matter prior to any policy position. Paragraph 9.69 states:
“The potential for renewable energy from biomass, (which is anything derived from plant or animal matter and includes agricultural, forestry wastes/residues and energy crops) may be increasingly realised over the plan period. In particular, the AONB woodlands are an under-utilised source of renewable energy. This will be further investigated in refining the Core Strategy.”
1.4 The general policies of the Local Plan relating to new development apply including: Policy DS1; Policy GD1 especially in relation to: Development being in keeping with and not unreasonably harming the
amenities of adjoining properties Respecting and not detracting from the character and appearance of
the locality Compatibility of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty;
and Policy EM1 relating to large scale business development.
2.1 The site lies within the small commercial area on the south side of Coppards Lane. The estate contains a number of businesses including the applicant’s own use, currently for the storage and blending of biomass materials and bark mulches.
20
2.2 The site is primarily an open flat concrete and tarmac yard surrounded by high galvanised steel fencing. There is currently an office building and a temporary portacabin building in the north east corner of the site.
2.3 The yard is served from the access road leading from Coppards Lane.
2.4 The application shows the new plant to be constructed on the southern part of the site. The first plans showed an area of approximately 45 metres by 35 metres. The actual site has been enlarged and the building footprint increased with the amended plans, although it seems clear that the new operation overall will still depend on the remainder of the current site particularly for parking and delivery vehicles.
2.5 Beyond the commercial area the area is rural in character before more open countryside and wooded areas give way to the village of Northiam to the south west of the site.
4.1 It is proposed to construct what was first described as a ‘biomass CHP (combined heat and power) plant’ in a single building. The initial plans indicated a large metal clad building 14 metres high to the ridge (12 metres to eaves). Subsequent plans then included a chimney stack to 22 metres omitted from the first submission. More recently a complete redesign of the building has been undertaken increasing the footprint, bringing storage of the wood material inside and proposing a completely new design approach in terms of form and materials. Further information (see separate APPENDIX DOCUMENT) suggests that this scheme should be referred to as a pure power generation (PPG) scheme rather than a CHP.
4.2 The new design shows an irregular shaped building with external plant. The maximum length of the built area along the eastern side is about 48 metres while the maximum length along the southern side is about the same length. The building is about 13 metres high at its maximum height falling to the rear under a curved roof form to about 8 metres to the eaves. Externally the cooling equipment is about 13 metres high positioned at the rear of the building, while the chimney measures about 19 metres (although in other documentation it may be as high as 22 metres). The new building uses brickwork and hardwood cladding under a steel profile curved roof form.
4.3 The following information, extracted from the original supporting statement with the application, describes in brief the purpose of the scheme and the main elements. (A more detailed description of the operation can be obtained
21
from the information accompanying the application on the website and extracts are also included in the separate APPENDIX DOCUMENT. A further document entitled ‘Questions and Answers’ is also contained in the APPENDIX DOCUMENT.) The initial statements refer to the plant as a CHP.
“... The facility will generate renewable heat and power using clean biomass as a fuel in a purpose-designed combustion system. Approximately 50,000 tonne annum of biomass will be processed, which will be sourced from East Sussex and surrounding areas.
... The biomass CHP plant will have a thermal capacity of about 16 MW with an electrical generating capacity of about 4.5 MW and will generate renewable electricity for approximately 8,000 hours per year. The biomass CHP plant will generate sufficient renewable electricity to supply approximately 6,000 households; this equates to the power requirements for ~16% of the households in Rother DC. The generated electricity will be exported to the local distribution network via an underground connector.
...The biomass CHP plant will also provide renewable thermal energy that will be used on site for drying the wood chip fuel, and additional outlets for the residual thermal energy will also be sought nearby.
...The biomass CHP plant and its associated fuel reception, storage and handling area will be housed within the building. One exception to this is the air blown condenser that will be required to recover the steam generated within the boiler plant, and this will be located externally, adjacent to the southern edge of the building. There will also be a requirement for a chimney to discharge emissions to atmosphere generated by the combustion of the biomass fuel. The chimney will be located within the main building and will protrude ~8 metres above the roof.
...The existing concrete apron in front of the building will provide access and turning capability for the delivery vehicles, and will also provide temporary parking for delivery vehicles outside of normal operating hours.
...Two waste streams will be generated by the process: Non-hazardous bottom ash and flyash from the combustion process,
and Liquid effluent in the form of boiler blow down water.
The bottom ash and flyash will be non-hazardous wood ash essentially, rich in potash and will have soil conditioning and fertilising properties that may be exploited subject to an appraisal of quality acceptance criteria. Alternatively, the ash will be consigned for disposal to landfill. Liquid effluent arising from the boiler blow-down will be treated on site and recycled back into the process. The treatment process will recover about 80% of the total flow, that would otherwise require more than 8,000m3 per annum of potable water to replenish the blow down effluent.”
22
4.4 Procedurally the proposal was screened in terms of the need for a formal Environmental Impact Assessment under the relevant Regulations before submission but it was determined (as I have noted for other schemes elsewhere) that a formal EIA was not required. Nevertheless the application is accompanied by considerable relevant supporting information on the relevant environmental matters.
5.1 Parish Council:- Object (in summary) – Drawings inadequate; application vague Fuel needed would not be available locally with consequent impact on
traffic movements and travelling distances Vague about market for electricity and connection to national grid No market for heat generated, therefore green credentials questionable Impact of chimney External siting of condensers likely to produce unacceptable noise Impact of airborne pollutants not adequately addressed Size and style of building totally inappropriate for site within High
Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty No mention of fire, safety and security considerations Impact of lighting Site does not currently operate on 24 hour basis and Traffic
Commissioners have attached strict conditions on OLs in this area Question storage of fuel and noise from movements No benefits to Northiam and green credentials questionableRevised scheme: Object (in summary) - Building may be more aesthetically pleasing but size is inappropriate
for site area and environment Other previous objectors reiterated and comment that the
unprecedented number of objections sent to Rother District Council reflects the strong feeling in the village that this proposal is totally inappropriate, unjustified and is not environmentally sustainable.
5.2 Highway Authority:- No objection subject to conditions on parking and turning arrangements within the site. The Authority comments:-
“Traffic Generation:It is evident from the submitted application that the existing permitted use of the site will result in approximately 54 vehicle movements per day of which 16 were HGVs.It is anticipated that the proposed Biomass CHP Plant will generate in the region of 26 vehicles per day of which 16 will be HGVs and the remaining 10 for staff.
Access:The proposed Biomass CHP Plant is to be served from the existing access from Coppards Lane. I consider that this access is suitable to serve the proposed development. Coppards Lane is served from the A268 in the east
23
and from the A28 in the west. I consider both these approach roads to be suitable for the proposed development.
It is also evident that adequate on-site parking and turning has been provided, including turning provision for HGV vehicles.
One slight concern is expressed regarding the Coppards Lane/A268 junction due to the substandard visibility, particularly looking north. However, taking into account the existing permitted use of the site I do not consider that the proposed Biomass CHP Plant will result in a significant increase of vehicles coming to and from the site. On this basis I do not feel that any objection could be sustained in the event of any appeal.
Parking:As part of the submitted application, the total number of parking spaces has been decreased from 11 to 9 (including one disability space). I consider that the proposed level of parking to be appropriate for 5 members of staff, plus visitors, and therefore I would not wish to raise an objection.”
5.3 Environment Agency:- Initial reply recommended conditions on any permission relating to contaminated land, piling and drainage.Further discussions have been undertaken in terms of any other licensing requirements.
5.4 Southern Water:- No objections.
5.5 Natural England:- Refer to standing advice in respect of protected species and ancient woodland.
5.6 High Weald AONB Unit:- Initial response (summarised): AONB Management Plan generally supports proposals for effective
and efficient renewable energy operations Development of this type could have significant impacts on the
landscape although this location is not itself incompatible with AONB Application does not adequately demonstrate either effective CO2
reductions or direct woodland management benefits in the High Weald AONB
No details of source materials What are supply distances and details of guaranteed supply? How is energy fed back to grid? What happens to thermal energy by-products? Significant traffic generation Scale of plant and its operation probably inappropriate in an AONB
Revised comments:“The submitted landscape appraisal concludes that the development is considered appropriate in both landscape and visual terms. As previously stated the Unit does not consider that an industrial use is incompatible in this location, and we welcome the design improvements to the building and additional landscaping and other mitigation measures (section 4.4.1). The
24
Unit did not seek to have the site restored (see para 4.5.5) but was simply making the point that just because a site is ‘degraded’ does not mean that it is acceptable for development (or that the development would have no impact). The duty in an AONB is always to conserve and enhance the landscape, and development is required to demonstrate how it achieves this additional duty of care, particularly a major development such as this. The Unit has not commented on the visual impacts of the development which must be determined locally.
Para 4.5.5 also concludes that ‘...the overall sustainability aims and objectives of the proposed development will seek to protect the landscape of the AONB in the long term.’ This remains the principle issue or test for the impact of this development on the AONB. If the application can demonstrate that the benefits of increased appropriate woodland management, the development of a local/regional woodfuel market, and achievable CO2 savings/reductions that contribute positively to the management of climate change, are realistic and achievable, then the development can contribute positively to the conservation and enhancement of natural beauty (under Objectives G3 and W4 of the High Weald AONB Management Plan 2004). The local planning authority needs to be satisfied that the development makes these contributions and can provide these benefits, especially to ‘local’ (AONB scale) woodland management to meet the requirements of the management plan.”
5.7 Director of Services – Environmental Health:- Comments incorporated in following report but in summary, having considered the reports with the application and having visited another biomass plant, raises no objections in respect of air pollution but objects on grounds of likely noise pollution given the location of the site.
5.8 Planning Notice:-
5.8.1 Northiam Conservation Society: Object (summarised) – No prior consultation Size and scale of building (and chimney) inappropriate in this location Impact of traffic; disruption to daily life No reference of connection to national grid Security, fire concerns Lighting impact Particulates
5.8.2 Newenden Parish Council: Object (summarised) – No formal consultation Visibility of scheme Impact of harmful emissions Impact of traffic movements Form of operation may change in future e.g. waste incineration
5.8.3 Hawkhurst Parish Council: Object – Importation of fuel on HGVs through Hawkhurst unacceptable
25
Plant should be sited nearer fuel source Would object to pylons if necessary to transfer power to grid
5.8.4 CPRE: Object (summarised) – Little information on wood sources Transport issues only dealt with cursorily; absence of traffic impact
assessment; question number of necessary vehicle movements 24 hour lighting No evidence on use of heat Impact of chimney Application vague on employment levels Cheapest possible agricultural-type buildings Insufficient environmental information Noise Likelihood that process will use waste Plant elsewhere refused recently because no demand for the heat
identified locally Where is fuel to be stored?Further comments question whether the scheme can be justified and suggest that the scheme would be unable to meet the DETR CHP quality assurance programme requirements.
5.8.5 Over 400 individual (or duplicate) letters of objection were received following the initial consultation. There are a few letters of support and many objectors while, fundamentally opposed to this scheme, accept or support the principle of renewable/sustainable energy. However the overwhelming number of correspondents object to the scheme. In summary the objections focus on the following areas:
5.8.5.1 Locational issues Rural location Disturbance to immediate neighbours History of Coppards Lane industrial estate in terms of excessive traffic
movements and consequent disturbance Inappropriate with High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Site selected only because it is owned by the applicants
5.8.5.2 Highways and traffic No Transport Impact Assessment submitted Under estimate of vehicle movements Under estimate of number of lorries required as not always full Impact of traffic on local rural roads Impact of traffic through Northiam and Newenden Lorry vibration Times of deliveries
5.8.5.3 Noise Noise from external movements (external storage) Noise from plant 24 hour working, 7 days a week
26
5.8.5.4 Pollution Emissions from chimney/air quality Smell Ash disposal Impact of lighting Use of heat Carbon footprint through traffic movements Waste water
5.8.5.5 The building Inappropriate design (comments relate to initial scheme) Height of building Height of chimney – visibility
5.8.5.6 Timber supply issues Timber sources unclear Longevity of timber supply Danger of plant changing to waste incineration in future if inadequate
timber supply
5.8.5.7 Other issues Question need for scheme No established connection to electricity grid Not a CHP as claimed as heat is not used Lack of Environmental Impact Assessment Displacement of existing use No benefit to village Lack of community involvement Urban facility Fire risk and safety
5.8.5.8 A further round of public consultation through readvertisement of the application has taken place in relation to the amended plans received. A limited number of additional letters have been received mainly repeating earlier objections.
6.1.1 Although submitted as a Combined Heat and Power Plant (CHP) the applicants have confirmed that the operation is essentially a pure power generation (PPG) plant. There is no immediate use for the majority of the heat generated other than internally within the plant. However the possibility of using the heat elsewhere is not discounted and the applicants have recently advised in letters of October 2 and 13 that they are investigating utilising the heat for fuel drying purposes and supplying the adjoining industrial estate with heat to support existing buildings on site. What is not at all clear at this stage
27
is the actual need for heat for businesses in the immediate location or whether there is any other possible use for the heat generated.
6.1.2 Approximately 50,000 tonnes of biomass (virgin timber and forestry residues to be sourced from the south east and imported to the site by lorry) will be processed per annum and the plant will have a thermal capacity of about 16 MWth with an electrical generating capacity of about 4.5 MWe and will regenerate renewable electricity for approximately 8,000 hours per year. The generated electricity – enough to supply approximately 6,000 households – will be exported to the local distribution network via an underground connector. However this means of connection and its location is not identified at this stage.
6.1.3 Figure 2.1 (page 8) in the separate APPENDIX DOCUMENT shows the process involved in diagrammatic form with the specific operations described in paragraphs 2.2.14 – 2.2.29.
6.1.4 The principle components of the scheme and its operation are: Biomass reception and handling Primary combustion chamber including associated secondary combustion
chamber Energy recovery system (steam boiler and associated turbine generators) Pollution control system (particulates) Chimney Residual storage handling and (possibly treatment) – ash
6.2 Main Issues
6.2.1 The Companion Guide to PPS22: Planning for Renewable Energy includes the following:
“The remit of consideration for planners is around the power plant and associated impacts and not the production of the fuel source. However, the impacts of growing and collecting the fuel are key to ensuring the successful development of a facility.”
It goes on to advise (para 45):
“Local planning authorities may wish to consider the following issues when determining an application:• the positive benefit of the plant to the local economy. The supply of
biomass fuel can secure a long-term income for farmers, forestry owners and contractors, and transport operators in rural areas. Some 80 to 90% of operational expenditure on biomass fuel supply can accrue to the local economy;
• visual intrusion – the plant is an industrial feature with a chimney. In certain weather conditions a plume may be evident from the chimney and/or drying equipment depending upon the design of the equipment;
• noise from traffic and plant operations. As an industrial development, BS 4142 may be the applicable standard;
28
• any effects on health, local ecology or conservation from airborne and water borne emissions (as discussed above);
• traffic to and from the site in order to transport biomass fuel and subsequent byproducts. Traffic volumes, and the associated noise may increase with the introduction of a large biomass power facility, as the scheme may require a continuous fuel supply; and,
• carbon mitigation.”
6.2.2 The main issues locally are the effects of the proposal on: The character and appearance of the immediate area; The impact on the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; The amenities of residents by reason of traffic generation, activity and
noise and any other potential pollution issues Timber supply and locational issues
6.2.3 The proposal in relation to the character and appearance of the immediate area
6.2.3.1 The industrial area in Coppards Lane has a long history and contains a variety of uses. The current applicants operate a landscape materials business supplying bark and mulch on land previously occupied by the Builder Center, who retain their own operation on the adjoining site with a separate access on Coppards Lane. The current landscape business is served via an internal access road, which also serves as a transport depot and other uses. Adjoining the Coppards Lane complex of commercial uses, but served from Whitebread Lane, is a further motor vehicle enterprise.
6.2.3.2 The history of this area is relevant not least because operations within the small industrial estate have at times been problematic for local residents. Although the transport site to the rear of this application site is subject to a lawful development certificate for the parking of vehicles, and other permissions have been granted for parking and storage uses, the Council with local residents has been successful in representations to the Traffic Commissioner in terms of restricting the number of vehicles based at this site under the Operators Licence. Such Operating Licences now restrict the number of vehicles able to be based on the site and the times of operation.
6.2.3.3 In respect of the application site itself, enforcement action was authorised in 2007 when a wood chipping machine had been used on site: the argument being that an unauthorised and undesirable material change of use to a B2 use (from a mixed B1/office and B8 storage use) had occurred. In the event no formal action was necessary as the activity was stopped.
6.2.3.4 While views of the estate as a whole are partially softened by trees (to varying degrees) from the south, east and west, the northern frontage to the Coppards Lane is relatively open. Existing buildings on both the AHS
29
and Builder Center site are of a low profile and external storage of building and timber materials are the main visible activities from Coppards Lane.
6.2.3.5 The highest feature on the industrial area is currently a 30 metre high telecommunication mast which is seen above the tree line from well beyond the immediate area. The proposal involves the introduction into the estate of a larger building, substantially higher and bulkier than the existing buildings on this front and most visible part of the site.
6.2.3.6 Despite a quite intensive use of the industrial area none of the current buildings on any of the existing sites are easily visible when viewed from outside the industrial area, and despite the level of commercial activity, Coppards Lane retains its character as a rural lane.
6.2.3.7 The introduction, therefore, of a substantial building that will be visible from the lane is a major issue in terms of the character of the immediate area. The introduction of a large new building would open a new chapter in the development of the estate.
6.2.3.8 As initially submitted, the scheme proposed a single metal clad building of a very utilitarian appearance. Responding to concerns over the approach to the design amended plans have recently been submitted together with a Landscape and Visual Appraisal.
6.2.3.9 This latest scheme completely alters the external form of the building and indicates the use of lightly coloured hard wood horizontal panelling, primarily at first floor, piers faced in locally sourced brick and ground level panels clad in white. Steel profile sheeting is used for the roof with the roof taking a curved form from the maximum height at the front of about 13 metres down to around 8 metres to the rear. Elevated above roof height is the chimney up to 22 metres and the horizontal condenser unit connected to external plant at the rear of the building. It is now proposed to create an internal area for the receipt and storage of timber for fuel – the previous proposal indicated external storage, with the building having a smaller footprint overall.
6.2.3.10 The scheme will introduce a new dominant building on a site where everything is currently of a lower profile but the quality of the building is significantly improved and clearly raises the standard of design. The issue is whether this can be considered a positive enhancement to the appearance of the area.
6.2.3.11 In addition the impact of both lighting and night time working are issues. Currently in the evenings and at night time all of the operators on this estate are closed. At night time the area is very quiet (a matter addressed more fully later) and there is very limited lighting on some of the sites. The lighting is not visible from any distance around being within the lower sites.
30
6.2.4 Impact on the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
6.2.4.1 To some extent the issues discussed above are relevant to the issue of the AONB.
6.2.4.2 Policy GD1 of the Local Plan states that:
"All development should: (iv) respect and not detract from the character and appearance of the
locality; and (v) be compatible with the conservation of the natural beauty of the High
Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty."6.2.4.3 There is also advice in PPS7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.
Paragraph 1 makes it clear that:
"(iv) New building development in the open countryside away from existing settlements, or outside areas allocated for development in development plans, should be strictly controlled..."
and "(vi) All development in rural areas should be well designed and inclusive,
in keeping and scale with its location, and sensitive to the character of the countryside and local distinctiveness.”
6.2.4.4 Paragraph 21 of PPS7 goes on to say that:
"Nationally designated areas comprising National Parks, the Broads, the New Forest Heritage Area and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), have been confirmed by the Government as having the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape and countryside should therefore be given great weight in planning policies and development control decisions in these areas..."
6.2.4.5 The above policies and advice demonstrate that the prime objective in rural areas is to conserve the landscape quality and character of the countryside - especially the countryside of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
6.2.4.6 In September the applicants submitted a Landscape and Visual Appraisal (from GP Planning) arguing that the site is visually well contained and that the building itself would be enclosed and only visible in short range views. It is argued also that as the chimney – though visible – will be lower than the adjoining mast it would not be the primary focal point within the landscape.
6.2.4.7 However although this is an established industrial area where it might be argued that a quality building would enhance the site and be a positive improvement (all other things being equal) in considering the impact on the AONB I am conscious that the views of the new building and its chimney
31
will not simply be local but more widespread from more distant viewpoints. This will be accentuated when the leaves are off the trees, which provide more of an element of screening in the summer.
6.2.4.8 The new, higher building, will add a new dimension to the existing industrial estate increasing its profile or prominence both locally and from wider views.
6.2.4.9 Mitigation measures are suggested in the Landscape Appraisal but the reality is that this is a tall building with a higher chimney on a very tightly constrained site. The site does not lend itself to significant landscaping and the scheme has not been designed at the outset with this in mind.
6.2.4.10 Having regard also to Policy EM1 which suggests that large-scale business development (which I consider this to be) will be focussed upon established and allocated business areas within development boundaries, the judgement is whether the small rural Coppards Lane estate should develop further in this manner given its position in the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
6.2.5 The effects of the proposal on the amenities of local residents
6.2.5.1 The potential impact on local residents (other than the visual impacts discussed above) encompasses a number of issues: in the immediate locality impacts relate to traffic movements, noise from the site and any potential pollution and then, beyond the immediate area, traffic movements to and from the site and any questions of wider air quality.
6.2.5.2 There are two occupied residential properties close to the property; Bonheur about 31 metres to the west and Lane Cottage about 72 metres to the east on the other side of the Whitebread Lane junction. A derelict bungalow – Brickfield Bungalow – lies even closer on the other side of the access road from the application site.
6.2.5.3 To the west along the end of Coppards Lane and continuing round into Station Road the built up area of Northiam begins. Within a 200 metres of the site there are a further 9 residential properties with increasing numbers of properties beyond, towards Northiam village.
Traffic6.2.5.4 It is fair to say that the industrial estate as a whole generates a regular
flow of large vehicles during the week. By their nature the Builder Center and the current AHS site receive deliveries from larger vehicles while Thomas Transport operate goods vehicles from their site. In addition a regular bus service enters and leaves the estate.
6.2.5.5 While historically there have been controls placed on the number of vehicles using the sites as an operating centre by the Traffic Commissioners (i.e. limiting the number of vehicles based on the estate) there are no specific controls limiting the overall number of traffic
32
movements on a daily basis. Anecdotally, it has been noted recently that the number of heavy vehicles using the AHS site has been low, but the applicants estimate that between six and twelve deliveries are made each day dependent on seasonality and the economic climate. Over a working day this is not a high number.
6.2.5.6 The planned volume of deliveries to the new plant is estimated at 8 deliveries per day (averaged over a year). This is based on 8 x 25 tonne loads from Mondays to Fridays, equivalent to 50,000 tonnes a year.
6.2.5.7 Traffic flows are a major concern to local residents. While a number of objectors argue that not all lorries will arrive full or nearly full, the applicants also suggest that a typical load would be 27 tonnes and that these calculations assume a maximum moisture content in the wood fuel. With low moisture levels it may be possible to reduce the projected volume of traffic by as much as 3 vehicles per day.
6.2.5.8 I would suggest that it will never be possible to accurately predict traffic levels, but bearing in mind the existing use of the site – both current levels, and the fact that with no further planning permission it would be quite possible to use the site much more intensely than at present – it may be difficult to sustain an argument that there will inevitably be an unacceptable increase in vehicle traffic. That said the fact that this particular use is dependent on HGV deliveries is a factor to be considered when considering the acceptability of this particular location for such a scheme, notwithstanding the current use.
6.2.5.9 Potentially, traffic will be drawn from a wide area and vehicles will have to use the local ‘A’ roads ultimately through Northiam, Beckley or Newenden. Simply replacing one heavy goods vehicle generator with another may not in itself a reason for refusal – the Highway Authority does not object – but whether Coppards Lane is suitable for this use is an issue. It is clear that this site is being proposed for this use primarily because the owners currently run a related timber business and this site is potentially available: its selection is not because of any systematic assessment of alternative sites.
Pollution issues 6.2.5.10 The impact of the proposal in terms of pollution includes such matters as
noise, emissions from the chimney (air quality), the treatment of ash, fire risk as well as light pollution.
Air quality:6.2.5.11 The process - due to the nature of the fuel (clean biomass) and the plant
size (thermal capacity) – does not require regulation under the Environmental Permitting Regulations either by the Environment Agency or the local authority. However it would be appropriate to attach relevant planning conditions to cover the type of matters that would have been contained in a Permit under the Regulations should one have been required. These would include emission concentrations for the various
33
pollutants.
6.2.5.12 The Clean Air Act 1993 does however apply and this covers matters such as the chimney height. The application details are satisfactory in this respect.
Smoke:6.2.5.13 There is comment about smoke from the chimney. Under normal
operating conditions no smoke will be emitted from the plant and any visible emission from the chimney will be haze or steam.
Ash:6.2.5.14 In respect of ash, the applicants comment as follows:
“Ash at the plant will come in two forms: bottom ash and fly ash.The total ash produced will come to 1-10% of the total amount of fuel burnt. Coal, by comparison, has ash content of 10-35%.
Of the ash produced, around 90% is bottom ash which is collected at the bottom of the furnace. The bottom ash can be a good source of organic potash, and could be used as a fertiliser in the local fruit farming and horticultural industries. It is removed by empty delivery lorries in a semi-moist state and does not produce dust.
The remaining 10% is fly ash and is captured in the chimney, as described above, using a bag filtration system. The sealed bags, which ensure that no ash or dust is emitted, are stored in a sealed container, before being disposed away from the site at a designated disposal area.”
The initial information submitted with the application suggested one load per week.
This is a matter that if permission is granted could be controlled by condition.
Lighting:6.2.5.15 Lighting in a relatively remote rural location is a consideration and
becomes more critical as the operation is to be 24 hours, 7 days a week. The applicants suggest “environmentally sensitive” lighting although this is not defined. It is suggested that outside normal working hours there will only be a need for low level lighting at points for Health and Safety purposes.
Noise:6.2.5.16 The question of noise is significant. PPG24: Planning and Noise is
relevant and it notes particularly that special consideration should be given to development which would affect the quiet enjoyment of, inter alia, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. A similar biomass plant at Eccleshall in Staffordshire has been inspected in the course of dealing with this application. Before addressing this issue in more detail the Environmental
34
Health Officer notes that while the Eccleshall Plant is a similar operation it is part of a bigger and noisier industrial estate as compared to Coppards Lane. The building is a basic steel building with insulation cut into a gently sloping hillside and with a larger internal fuel storage area than proposed in this case: these features may limit noise emissions from the plant in certain directions. The actual plant for the process is similar to that proposed here and the visit was beneficial.
6.2.5.17 At Eccleshall a steady internal noise level of 96dB LAeq (average) was measured. The noise level outside the building with the door open was 75dB LAeq and it was 70dB LAeq with the door closed at a distance of 15 metres away directly in front of the door. The dominant noise source was the turbine having a tonal quality – a ‘whine’. As such the noise would attract a 5dB penalty (using BS4142 methodology), this needing to be added to the plant noise level. Thus we would have external noise rating levels of 80dB (open door) and 75 dB (closed door) at 15 metres. It is typical of consultants to make reference to BS4142 (Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas) but – and as stated in the applicant’s Noise Assessment report – it is not suitable for assessing noise when the background and rating noise (plant noise plus penalty of 5dB) levels are very low. ‘Very low’ for background is below 30 dB and for rating levels it is 35dB. Such is the case at Northiam – based on predicted plant noise and measured background.
6.2.5.18 It is still useful however to compare measured (preferred) or predicted levels against measured background. The predicted plant noise levels plus penalty therefore need to be compared with the actual background. At Northiam the measured background level on a calm clear night (2.30am on the 25th September) was 18dB LA90. The area was tranquil with no traffic noise or noise from any other source: it was peaceful and perfectly quiet. The difference in noise levels based on prediction would be in the range of 8 to 18 dB after adding the 5dB penalty (or 3 to 15 dB if the penalty has already been added – it is unclear in the report). Such differences in noise level would be very noticeable and would present loss of amenity and/or cause an actionable statutory nuisance. Using the actual measured levels from Eccleshall and assuming similar building construction and layout and measurement position the difference between measured level plus penalty and the Northiam measured background would be 72 (door open) and 67 (door closed). This would be unacceptable, even in the day-time.
6.2.5.19 The Noise Assessment report at 7.1 states that it is considered reasonable to assess the noise from the biomass CHP plant against a background of 30dB LA90. This is strongly disagreed with - the actual measured background level is 18 dB LA90. The Noise Assessment report again at 7.1 states that “if further protection was felt necessary….would probably be measures such as local barriers and local façade attenuation. Such measures …. could be devised when the precise location of the biomass CHP plant is agreed in relation to the windows of habitable rooms of the
35
closest house.” This indicates that precise details are not known and the predictions may not be accurate.
6.2.5.20 The Council’s general approach is to advise that noise levels from new development should not increase existing background noise levels by more than 2dB. A difference of 2dB represents a change in level that is just detectable. It is considered appropriate to insist on this criteria at this locality because it is so quiet through the night. The target level for the plant would therefore be 20dB with no tonality. If this can be met for the night-time hours then obviously plant noise would not be an issue during day-time/evening. This would be appropriate in protecting the AONB as an ‘area’ as well as nearby residential properties. The nearest residential property is a single storey building Brickfield Bungalow only some 19 metres to the west (measured from the front of the bungalow to the western edge of the site). This appears to have been omitted from consideration. From the information given including predictions and from actual measurements I do not feel that the criteria can be met. Failure to meet this criteria would create an island of new noise in an otherwise relatively quiet area especially at night. Even during the day the area is not particularly noisy – the dominant noise source being traffic on the A28 with very little plant/machinery noise from any locations in the area.
6.2.6 Locational issues and timber supply
6.2.6.1 The Companion Guide to PPS22 deals with locational issues and identifies three considerations in relation to location, namely feedstock availability, customers and grid connection.
6.2.6.2 The proposed plant relies on importing to the site, virgin timber and forestry residues. It does not rely on burning waste wood; such matter would fall to the County Planning Authority to consider.
6.2.6.3 As the plant relies on timber it is inevitable that the raw material will need to be drawn from sources beyond the immediate area.
6.2.6.4 In terms of fuel availability the PPS22 guidance comments (para 38 - Technical Appendix) that:
“Biomass is a low value, high volume commodity that significantly increases in cost with even short transport distances. For economic and environmental reasons, the ideal maximum transport distance for fuel is therefore about 40 km; for some larger plant, this may be considerably greater, particularly if fuel can be transported by rail or sea. Generally, it is preferable to locate the proposed plant at the ‘centre of gravity’ of the proposed feedstock. As it may be necessary to seek a variety of feedstocks for a number of reasons including security of supply and regulatory policy, this centre of gravity will inevitably be influenced by the location of the different feedstocks.”
36
6.2.6.5 Some objectors have questioned the longevity of the supply. For their part the applicants state:
“As with the viability study Ahs carried out (see above), the firm also needed to be certain that raw material would be available for use at the plant. This though is a particular area of strength for the firm, being already one of the largest manufacturers of woodchip biomass in the UK. Biomass is a young business, but Ahs is already delivering from various sites around 3,000 tonnes of fuel each week to customers across the country. Knowing the business as well as they do, and having such a strong market reputation, must suggest that the firm would not be investing £12m-14m if it were not aware of the availability of wood.
For a plant like that at Northiam to be a success, it has to draw material from within a 50 mile radius. It is impractical to think that green electricity can be generated from a smaller area, but it is also unrealistic to suggest that the project will not have a beneficial effect on local woodland, and rural employment...”
“Ahs works with large numbers of tree surgeons in the region, who supply non-coppice woodchip from the pruning and maintenances of trees with local authorities, businesses and private houses. Within 50 miles of Northiam this market alone generates around 950 tonnes per week (close to 50,000 tonnes a year). Much of it currently ends up being used at plants in Cheshire, Shropshire and Norfolk, and historically much would have gone to landfill sites. Please note this information is available for the scrutiny of the planners.
In addition, Ahs is currently purchasing or harvesting each week about 400 tonnes
of chestnut coppice chip wood from Kent and Sussex Ahs is constantly forward purchasing standard coppice for future
supplies Ahs has just completed two projects in woodland around Ashford that
have provided the firm with 5,000 tonnes of chestnut coppice Ahs is in touch with the existing fencing market in Kent and Sussex to
enhance supply Ahs is continually involved in projects to clear up neglected woodland
which will take many years for results to be noticed.”
The applicants add that:“Historically, woodland in Kent and Sussex has been neglected for many years. The need for renewable energy is giving the forestry industry a much needed shot in the arm. It is creating new employment, it is enhancing the waning biodiversity, it is improving the woodlands for leisure activity. Ahs has shown that their involvement is already having a hugely beneficial effect. Having a biomass plant in the region will finally mean that the energy stored in the wood can be used sustainably for the benefit of the region.”
37
6.2.6.6 The High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Unit expressed initial concern about the source of timber and discussions have taken place between the Unit and the applicants. For their part they are of the view that there would be value in the applicants providing more detail on how the applicants will stimulate or develop the forestry end of its operation and how the plant would encourage sustainable woodland management.
6.2.6.7 Understanding the supply chain for fuel is not an easy task, particularly given that proposals for new CHPs and other biomass plants appear to be coming forward in increasing measure and there will be some competition in the supply chain.
6.2.6.8 What is clear is that timber will be sourced from a wider area and while the use of sustainable woodland is to be encouraged, the principle need is to ensure that this remains a facility accepting virgin timber and forestry residues rather than a biomass facility fed by waste wood. In order to do this it seems that fuel will be sourced from a greater distance than the 40km quoted in the PPS and that Northiam is not necessarily the ‘centre of gravity’ of the proposed feedstock. (See 6.2.6.4 above).
6.2.6.9 In sustainability terms objectors have raised the issue of carbon footprint and transport movements. Paragraph 24 of PPS:22 Renewable Energy states:
“For biomass projects, the need to transport crops to the energy production plant does have the potential to lead to increases in traffic. Local planning authorities should make sure that the effects of such increases are minimised by ensuring that generation plants are located in as close a proximity as possible to the sources of fuel that have been identified. But in determining planning applications, planning authorities should recognise that there are other considerations (such as connections to the Grid and the potential to use heat generated from the project) which may influence the most suitable locations for such projects.”
The South East Plan states:
“For biomass, issues to consider include the transportation of biomass fuel to the plant, the scale and design of buildings and the feasibility of combined heat and power. Operation of such plants, including monitoring and control of emissions, will be regulated by the Environment Agency to strict standards. Co-firing of conventional fossil fuel plants with biomass is likely to contribute to the achievement of the targets, at least in the short term, and should help create a market for, and stimulate, further development of biomass fuels.
Use of biomass fuel sourced close to the plant should be encouraged to maximise benefits in terms of carbon savings and rural development and reduced transport distances. Planting of energy crops has the potential to change landscape character and affect biodiversity, positively or negatively, depending on location. This is outside of planning control but the source of fuel, and location of plant in relation to this (its proximity)
38
should be a consideration in determining proposals.”
The applicants suggest that there will be no increase in traffic, and while I am not convinced that this in itself is sufficient argument for the scheme – as I have noted elsewhere that transport movements are not easily quantified – it seems inevitable that sustainable timber will have to be drawn from a wider area. It would seem a difficult exercise, therefore, to calculate any overall benefit of sustainable energy production against any increase in carbon footprint from traffic movements.
6.2.6.10 Other questions of location and the use of this particular site arise in a number of forms in the objections to the scheme. Apart from the High Weald AONB location and traffic implications in the area considered elsewhere, it is also suggested:– That this is essentially an urban facility– That the site has only been chosen because the applicants own the
site– That there is no benefit to the village from the scheme; and– That the new use will simply displace existing employment from the
village– That the connection to the Grid is not specified
6.2.6.11 While a power station may be thought to be more of an urban use, power stations generally are not found exclusively in urban areas. Thus, as a matter of principle the use of a rural site is not unacceptable. Government guidance (see para 1.1.1) which advises local authorities on striking a balance between encouraging new projects and protecting local landscapes might also imply that rural sites cannot be excluded. Nevertheless the criteria for controlling development in the countryside are strict and this matter has been addressed above in relation to the High Weald AONB in particular (see Section 6.2.4).
6.2.6.12 It is true that the application does take advantage of the fact that the applicants own the site and operate a timber business but this in itself is neither a reason for supporting or for opposing the scheme. Nevertheless the scheme is in this sense opportunist and does not follow any assessment of alternative sites.
6.2.6.13 The applicants have commented on the loss of existing employment noting that existing office jobs will be relocated, while the new project will create employment both on site and further afield.
6.2.6.14 Finally in terms of grid connection the PPS22 Companion Guide (para 40 of Technical Appendix) comments that:
“Due to cost considerations, the majority of electricity generation projects need to be located close to existing grid infrastructure with the capacity to accept the proposed generation capacity. (It may be possible for a very large plant to bear the cost of infrastructure improvement).”
39
6.2.6.15 Although the applicants seem confident on connecting to the grid I have been provided with no specific information on this issue.
7.1 In principle – and in line with both local and central government policy – a scheme of this type to provide an alternative energy source from sustainable timber, might be a project to be encouraged. However the provisions of both the South East Plan and Planning Policy Statements, quoted above, indicate the type of balance to be struck in considering the appropriateness of specific sites.
7.2 In this instance the location of the site within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is a significant factor and visually the scheme will have a significant impact when compared to the current situation. I consider the scale of the building to be out of keeping with the character of the immediate area while the height of the chimney will have wider prominence accentuated by any haze or steam plume emitted.
7.3 The introduction of this use to the industrial estate would be at variance with the historic approach which has generally allowed only storage/warehousing type uses. Furthermore the local planning authority (and local residents) have been vigilant in the past in terms of seeking to control both the types of uses on the estate and the impact of existing uses, through both the Traffic Commissioners (in terms of Operators Licences) and planning control.
7.4 While industrial uses are not alien to the AONB and existing estates do expand and change, this is a particularly quiet site, especially so at night time when measured noise levels have been as low as 18dB. Even if traffic movements are confined to daytime hours and do not exceed those existing, the general character of the site will change in terms of day to day deliveries and operations. At another biomass plant noise levels of up to 80dB (measured outside the building) were experienced. Such noise levels and a 24 hour operation with lighting would be difficult to countenance in this quiet rural location especially at night time.
7.5 The possible source of the timber has been difficult to unravel in detail, but I do not doubt that the applicants’ business contacts and existing operations will give them some advantages in accessing supplies. Traffic flows are unknown and while I would not suggest refusing permission on this ground, I am mindful of the impact of regular lorry movements – possibly more regular lorry movements – in the local area and on the wider network. It does seem clear that recently the amount of traffic generated by the site has been very low.
7.6 Similarly in terms of the longevity of timber supply this is an unknown, and if in the future the plant required non-virgin timber waste products, other issues may arise.
40
7.7 The scheme provides no direct local benefit and while originally proposed as a CHP it is in reality a PPG scheme with a very limited possibility of some of the heat produced being utilised.
7.8 The Environmental Health Officer is satisfied with the information provided in relation to pollution and while the connection to the grid is unclear (but is likely to involve cabling southwards) these are not overriding issues.
7.9 As with most planning decisions there are balances to be struck, but I do not see the possible need for electricity to outweigh the negative aspects of introducing a power plant into this quiet rural setting. The applicants have not set out any environmental, social or economic benefits specific to the proposal as suggested by paragraph 5.9 of PPS22. It is not sufficiently strong an argument that this is an existing commercial site or that the design is now much improved on the plain industrial building first mooted. The overall change to the site is too significant and the scheme cannot be said to conserve or enhance the landscape of the High Weald AONB.
7.10 Although coming to the conclusion that the proposal should be refused I have also considered whether there is scope to grant permission on the basis of the possible conditions offered in the Companion Guided to PPS22, namely:
layout and appearance of plant, drying/storage facilities to be approved; mitigation of transport movements (e.g. limiting the maximum number of
deliveries or the delivery times); screening of plant and/or drying or storage facilities; work to be carried out in accordance with method statement agreed by the
local authority.
In my view attempting to address these issues would not overcome the fundamental objection to the use of this particular site.
1. Although the Coppards Lane site is an established commercial area it is relatively unobtrusive and not prominent in the wider area: the uses on the frontage of Coppards Lane particularly, including the application site, are of a low scale nature and primarily storage uses. In comparison, the scheme would introduce a substantial building and a 24 hour industrial process which, by reason of the size of the building and its chimney and the scale of the operation and regular HGV delivery movements, would not be in keeping and scale with its location, or sensitive to the character of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty location. Any perceived benefits of the scheme
41
are insufficient to outweigh the adverse impact of the proposal and as such the scheme would conflict with Policy GD1(ii)(iv)(v) of the Rother District Local Plan and the provisions of PPS7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.
2. Having regard to the tranquil rural nature of the area in general and the scale and type of the operation it has not been demonstrated that a use of this type could be located in this area without detriment in terms of noise generation both to the character of the area and to the residential amenities of local properties. As such the scheme would be contrary to Policy GD1(ii)(iv) and (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Case Officer: Mr Richard Wilson (Tel: 01424 787616)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: NORTHIAM
Ward Member: Councillor M MooneyCouncillor R Parren
Reason for Committee consideration: Member referral: Referred from Notified D list by Councillor M Mooney
Statutory 8 week date: 29 October 2009___________________________________________________________________
This application is included in the list of site inspections.___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 The application is subject primarily to Policies GD1 and HG8 of the Local Plan, the latter relating to extensions to dwellings generally but also containing specific reference to development in the countryside and “extensions or alterations to buildings that have previously been converted to residential use.”
2.1 The converted Oast is situated in the countryside, within the AONB, between Horns Cross and Clayhill. The conversion to residential use took place in the early seventies and although not tied to an agricultural worker the property has been continually occupied in connection with Great Stent Farm.
3.1 A/70/186 Oast to dwelling - Granted___________________________________________________________________
4.0 PROPOSAL
4.1 The scheme is to extend the oast to provide accommodation for both the current owner who will remain in occupation and for his son and family who currently live in Tunbridge Wells who now runs the farm. The building as extended will remain as a single dwelling house.
4.2 A comprehensive Design and Access Statement and a full Planning Supporting Statement have been submitted (see website). These set out the history of the property, the need for the accommodation and the proposal in full.
4.3 The application is described in the Design and Access Statement as follows:-
“The proposal is to refurbish and extend the existing property to provide a more appropriate dwelling to serve the needs of the applicants and Great Stent Farm as a whole in the twenty first century. In effect, under the proposals, The Oast will remain the principal residential property serving the Farm – something that is essential if the Farm is to be properly managed and remain a viable entity in the future.
The principle of such an approach is entirely appropriate from a planning policy perspective although it is recognised that care must be taken in the design approach given the application site’s location within the AONB.
The proposed extension would provide ground and first floor accommodation to the side (south west) and rear (south) elevations. The accommodation would be used solely for residential purposes. The total amount of floorspace proposed in the extension is 94.5 square metres.”
4.4 The scheme also involves raising the ridge line of the property to deliberately increase the pitch of the roof for design reasons. The applicants argue that:
“It will ensure the roof is in proportion with the rest of the building A lower pitch would mean that the pitch of the proposed catslides to the
extensions would be very similar and in some cases greater. Normally, a catslide roof would be expected to have a lower pitch to the principal roof and the increased pitch to the main roof would achieve this
A lower pitch would mean that the size of the roof to the dormer on the front elevation would increase; and
The proposed roof pitch is more in keeping with a building of this type and age and the same pitch is preferred. Lower pitched roofs tend to give a more modern feel and appearance to a dwelling which would be inappropriate in this context given the need to respect the character of the roundels.”
45
4.5 Also externally it is proposed to refurbish the roundels and generally address the state of the property by the following actions:
“Remove the extensive ivy growth to the south eastern roundel Refurbish and redecorate the existing cowels Retain and repair the existing plain tiles to the roofs Replace the existing timber windows with oak framed windows Repair cracked and spalled brickwork using bricks to match existing and
mortar to match existing strength and colour; and Retain and repair the existing steps and dwarf wall all to match existing.”
4.6 The oast is currently a good sized four bedroom house. Internally the scheme will now provide:
Ground floor –Porch, mud room, utility roomKitchen, dining room and living roomTV room and farm office
First floor –Five bedrooms – two with en suitesBathroom
5.2 Rural Estates Surveyor: “Conclusioni. The proposed extension of the oast is an extension to a dwelling formed
as a result of the conversion in 1970. There is no Agricultural Occupancy Condition attached to the oast and it was not therefore considered as a condition to the planning permission.
ii. The oast is used as an agricultural dwelling and will continue to be used as such. From the agricultural point of view in assessing the needs of the enterprise I consider that the existing layout of the oast and the amount of accommodation is satisfactory without taking into account the personal requirements/benefits to the applicant and his family as set out in the planning statement.
iii. The oast does not form part of the farm ownership and stands in an area of about 0.37 hectares.
iv. The fact that the oast does not form part of the farm leads me to the conclusion that there is no agricultural justification for the extension and that as it stands alone it is probably more appropriate to consider the proposal by reference to the relevant rural planning policies dealing with domestic dwellings as I assume the principle of such residential conversion was considered in 1970.”
After discussions with the applicants the Estates Surveyor has commented further:
46
“... I have read the details sent in by the applicant. Advice in Annex A of PPS7 is quite clear when it says that it is the needs of the enterprise which is of concern and not the circumstances of individuals involved. I consider that this is the case on this farm. It has to be acknowledged that it would be more convenient for the applicant to be on site but there are 3 dwellings on the farm to attend to the needs of the enterprise. The problem being who should occupy the oast.”
5.3 Planning Notice: No representations.___________________________________________________________________
6.0 APPRAISAL
6.1 A previous application for a new house in 2005 on the farm (RR/2005/2819/P) was made on the basis of agricultural need, having regard to PPS7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. That application was withdrawn before it was determined.
6.2 The need for the applicant to live on the holding is argued as justification for the extension: it being suggested that it would be preferable to extend an existing house than to re-apply for a completely new house which would have a greater impact in the countryside, which would be the ‘fall back’ position if this application is unsuccessful. In respect of the agricultural merits the Council has sought the advice of the Rural Estates Surveyor.
6.3 The main issue is the scale and design of the extension to a dwelling in the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. A second aspect is the need for the accommodation in connection with the agricultural holding (although the house is not part of the holding, nor is it tied to agriculture).
6.4 Design and scale
6.4.1 The nineteen seventies conversion of this oast is not a good example in design terms and the excessive number of window and door openings, the rear porch and front dormer contribute to an overly domestic appearance. Nevertheless the main bulk of the building remains well proportioned and despite the over elaborate and poor detail it retains something of the simplicity of the original building.
6.4.2 The proposal involves more than a 50% increase in overall floorspace and an increase in the footprint of the building on two sides; realigning the rear wall and significantly extending the property to the south west side.
6.4.3 The scheme also involves an increase in the overall roof height of the main house and will introduce several new architectural elements - including the catslide roof to what will be, effectively, a new cross wing at the south west end. The result is a confusing mixture of architectural references which would detract from the more simple form of the original oasthouse to the overall detriment of the building. By reason of these significant additions the application conflicts with the objectives of Policy HG8 in respect of previously
47
converted farm buildings while the overall design and appearance conflicts with Policy GD1(iv) and, as it impacts on the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, with Policy GD1(v).
6.5 Agricultural need
6.5.1 Having regard to the close connection with the farm it is appropriate for the local planning authority to consider whether there may be any agricultural justification for the large extension and to assess whether these might allow the large extension which is otherwise contrary to policy.
6.5.2 The applicant’s father lives in the oast; the applicant is his son who currently commutes daily from Tunbridge Wells to manage the farm. The applicant’s father suffers from ill health and cannot live independently. The proposal would allow the father to remain in his home, in the countryside where he has always lived, and enable the applicant and his wife both to manage the farm locally and provide care for the father.
6.5.3 The independent advice from the Local Authority Rural Appraisals surveyor is that there is no agricultural justification for the extension. The farm has two other cottages occupied by agricultural workers and the oast, while in a separate ownership, has historically been occupied in connection with the farm. Without any agricultural justification of the extension, which is proposed for personal reasons, the proposal should be considered in the light of Policies HG8 and GD1.
6.5.4 Although the case is not made on basis of PPS 7, I am mindful of paragraph 9 of Annex A which states, in respect of the size of dwellings:
“Agricultural dwellings should be of a size commensurate with the established functional requirement. Dwellings that are unusually large in relation to the agricultural needs of the unit, or unusually expensive to construct in relation to the income it can sustain in the long-term, should not be permitted. It is the requirements of the enterprise, rather than those of the owner or occupier, that are relevant in determining the size of dwelling that is appropriate to a particular holding.”
6.5.5 In respect of the size of the existing house the Rural Estates Surveyor comments:
“From the agricultural point of view in assessing the needs of the enterprise I consider that the existing layout of the oast and the amount of accommodation is satisfactory without taking into account the personal requirements/benefits to the applicant and his family as set out in the planning statement.”
7.1 I consider that the proposal fails in respect of Policies HG8 and GD1 of the Local Plan. I have however considered whether there is any specific justification for the large extension in agricultural terms but have concluded that the matter is one primarily of the personal circumstances of the family and not of functional need in terms of the enterprise. In my view such personal circumstances should not over-ride the normal policy of controlling development in the countryside.
1. The proposed extensions and alterations to the converted oast are both excessive in size in relation to the original building and of an inappropriate design. The proposed additions would create a confusing mixture of architectural references which would detract from the oast, which - while poorly altered in the past - essentially still retains its simple form. The proposal, by reason of its size and design would not respect the character and appearance of the original rural building and is not compatible with the conservation of the natural beauty of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. As such the scheme conflicts with Policies HG8 and GD1 (iv) and (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
2. The proposed extensions to the house cannot be justified in terms of any overriding agricultural need for the accommodation; the application being made solely on the basis of personal preferences and circumstances of the applicants. There are thus no exceptional circumstances that might over-ride Policies HG8 and GD1 of the Rother District Local Plan.
Case Officer: Mr Roger Scott (Tel: 01424 787610)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: PEASMARSH
Ward Member: Councillor R ParrenCouncillor M Mooney
Reason for Committee consideration: Head of Planning - Major application
Statutory 13 week date: 09 November 2009___________________________________________________________________
This application is included in the list of site inspections.___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 Rother District Local PlanPolicies EM1, EM13, EM14 and GD1
Policy EM14 states:-“Further significant retail development will only be permitted outside town centres or district centres, as defined on the Proposals Map, where a quantitative and qualitative need for the development is demonstrated and the location is justified, having regard to other provisions made in the Plan and the sequential test in PPS6 and it otherwise meets policies in the Plan and criteria (a) – (j) in Structure Plan policy SH3.”
2.1 The application relates to the existing Jempsons food store which is located to the west of Peasmarsh on the A268 just outside the village development boundary. The overall site is approximately 2ha and comprises the existing food store and restaurant, car parking, petrol filling station and recycling centre. The new food store opened in 2001 following a complete redevelopment of the site.
2.2 The existing food store and restaurant has a gross internal floor space of 2857 sq.m. and employs 64 f/t and 47 p/t staff.
3.2 The most relevant planning consent is that for redevelopment of the site.
3.3 RR/98/762/P Demolish store and erect new food store with bakery, post office, pharmacy and cafeteria and extension to existing car park – Approved Conditional
4.1 The erection of a new building on the frontage of the site between the landscaped bund along the A268 and the existing petrol filling station to provide a home and garden retail unit. It will provide retail sales and restaurant on the ground floor with part mezzanine floor for offices and storage.
4.2 Total gross internal floor space will be 1622sq.m., including 240sq.m. for the proposed restaurant. The restaurant will be moved to the building from the existing store. An additional 10 f/t and 8 p/t employees are anticipated.
4.3 A traditional building form is proposed with a number of pitched roof elements which reflect the design and materials of the existing store on the site. External cladding materials will include facing bricks, plain clay roofing tiles, untreated cedar cladding and powder coated metal windows and door frames.
4.4 The existing recycling facility will be relocated to land near Pond Cottage, served off Tanhouse Lane.
4.5 Supporting documents:– Design and Access Statement– Planning and Retail Impact Assessment– Transport Statement– Arboricultural survey and Constraints
5.2 Highway Authority:- Recommends highway conditions and makes the following comments:
“Existing Access:The proposed development is to be served from Tanhouse Lane which is in turn served from Main Street (A268). I consider the existing access from Main Street to be adequate in order to serve the proposed Home and Garden Centre. The existing mini-roundabout on Tanhouse Lane is also considered appropriate to serve the development.
Internal layout:It is evident from the submitted plans that the proposed internal layout is to remain similar to the existing. While I would not wish to raise any objection on this basis, I would wish to ensure that deliveries to the proposed Home and Garden can be achieved. It is unclear from the submitted plan (drawing number 08-02) as to the exact delivery entrance so I assume that they will occur via the Yard to the southeast corner of the unit. If this is not the case then I would wish to see an amended plan showing the proposed ‘delivery’ area.
Parking:As part of the proposed development it is anticipated that the amount of available parking on-site will decrease by 32 spaces. Taking into account the existing and proposed use of the site it is considered acceptable that 196 spaces are to be provided.The existing food store (2750m2) require that a maximum of 152 spaces be allocated for that use and the 1689m2 Home and Garden use should be provided with an additional 68 spaces in accordance with the County Council’s adopted Parking Standards. Taking into account the rural location of the site and that it is considered Zone 4 with the County Council’s parking standard a relaxation of up to 25% can be considered from the maximum.It is therefore considered that a development of this size would be required to provide a maximum of between 165 and 220 parking spaces as part of the development. The 196 currently being proposed is therefore deemed acceptable.It is also evident that suitable cycle parking has been provided as part of the proposal.
Traffic Generation:It is widely accepted that a Home and Garden Superstore is likely to generate less daily vehicular movements compared with the existing food store. From the evidence submitted I accept that the proposal will generate a minimal amount of new traffic to the site when taking into account the number of linked trips that will occur.
53
LSAID:Due to the unique nature of this site I am unable to comment at this stage on the Local Sustainable Accessibility Improvements Contribution that would be required for a development of this type. While I would wish for local services such as Bus Stops to be upgraded I will produce a detailed response with regard to the contribution following further consultation with other departments within the County Council.”
5.3 Highway Authority – Rights of Way:- “I can confirm that the Rights of Way group has no objection to the application, contingent upon access to the Public Footpaths running through the application site being maintained at all times, in principle.We would however draw attention to the condition of the steps marked on the attached plan which give cause for concern. In view of their construction to accommodate the original store development, and in the interest of maintaining what is considered to be principally pedestrian access to the store, we would ask that consideration is given to minor works towards their improvement being made a condition of the proposed development.”
5.4 Southern Water:- Request a condition regarding foul and surface water drainage.
5.5 Environment Agency:- Initially raised issues regarding surface water drainage but following consideration of drainage details have advised that no further information is required. A condition regarding contaminated land is requested.
5.6 Building Control Manager:- Advises that disabled access will be dealt with as part of the Building Regulation process but raises a potential issue in respect of users of the disabled car parking bays avoiding the ‘anti-ram bollards’ in their approach to the building.
5.7 Planning Notice:- No representations received.___________________________________________________________________
6.0 APPRAISAL
6.1 Retail Impact
6.1.1 In accordance with policy requirements a retail impact assessment has been submitted dealing with the quantitative and qualitative need and sequential testing for out of centre sites. Policy EM14 allows the development of further significant retail development outside town centres where it is justified as above and the sequential test has been followed.
6.1.2 In terms of qualitative need the submitted report concludes:-“6.2.3. ... The very limited scale of the additional convenience floorspace
proposed at Peasmarsh will impact most on the Jempson Budgens store – which is in the same ownership and control as the application proposal. The Rye store is to be the subject of a significant extension (the impact of which on Peasmarsh store is considered in the analysis
54
in section 6.0 below) and this will help to increase Rye’s market share in a catchment characterised by leakage to Hastings, Tenterden and Ashford.
6.2.4 In terms of the Home and Garden proposal there is no direct competition in Rye and whilst some shops will sell similar products (including Jempson Budgen) there is no significant overlap and no single retailer will be unduly affected.
6.25 The two elements of the application proposal will have no significant impact on Rye Town Centre. The applicant has a vested interest in Rye having two retail outlets there including the principal convenience store. The centre has a strong retail identify, a diverse, and for its size, comprehensive retail offer. The applications will have no adverse qualitative impact.”
6.1.3 On the qualitative assessment the submitted report concludes:-“8.6 The importance of employment development in rural areas is
acknowledged in section 9.1 of the Local Plan and section 9.3 sets out the need to encourage local businesses to expand. It is important to weigh heavily the employment and economic benefits of this proposal by one of the district’s significant local employers.
8.7 Section 6.0 of the report analyses in detail the composition of Rye Town Centre and concludes that there is very little overlap between the proposed Home and Garden Centre and existing bulky goods retailers in Rye and therefore no unacceptable qualitative impacts.
8.8 Section 7.0 considers quantitative impact. There are a number of unimplemented convenience retail consents outside the catchment which will impact upon the catchment. Even taking these into account and allowing for increasing sales densities, the extra convenience turnover arising from the re-use of the space freed up be the relocation of the café will not result in unacceptable levels of impact.
8.9 In respect of the Home and Garden Centre, even allowing for the increasing sales densities, the turnover required for the new development will not require the diversion of trade and is therefore acceptable in quantitative terms.”
6.1.4 The sequential test concludes that there are no other suitable sites available within Rye. It is relevant to note that the emerging Core Strategy of the Local Development Framework has identified the need for approx 1,650sq.m. of additional convenience floorspace within or adjacent to Rye Town Centre in the period up to 2016. The current application does not propose additional convenience retail floorspace other than rearrangement of floorspace in the existing store, but in terms of retail impact this additional amount (approx 112sq.m.) is not significant.
6.1.5 Subject to restricting by condition use of the new building to home and garden/bulky goods, the proposal falls within the terms of Policy EM14.
55
6.2 Visual Impact on the AONB
6.2.1 The site occupies a corner of the existing car park and because of differences in levels and banking/landscaping will have little impact on views from the road or on the adjacent property The Cock Inn. The proposal will require cutting into the bank at the frontage and extension of the existing reinforced embankment around this part of the site. This will result in loss of some young trees on the inner embankment; however further planting is possible at the top of the bank.
6.2.2 The building will be seen from views to the west on the A268 road but this will be mitigated by the proposed design, which seeks to break-up the form of the roof and maintain a relatively low profile. I consider the detailed design is acceptable on this site.
6.3 Access and Parking
6.3.1 The Highway Authority are satisfied that the development will generate only a minimal amount of new traffic to the site, particularly taking into account linked trips. The car parking on the site will decrease by 32 spaces but it is considered the 196 spaces for the site is acceptable. The applicant has clarified detail of deliveries for the site.
6.3.2 The existing access is suitable to serve the development. The Highway Authority will be commenting further on the need for a Local Sustainable Accessibility Improvements Contribution in relation to the development.
6.4 Residential Amenities
6.4.1 There are no residential properties (other than within the applicant’s ownership) that are affected by the proposal.
7.1 The development meets the requirements of Policy EM14 and can be supported and will provide a wider choice for customers using the site. The siting and design of the building in this location will have an acceptable impact on the AONB and the visual character of the area.
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT (FULL PLANNING) DELEGATED (ADDITIONAL HIGHWAY COMMENTS)___________________________________________________________________
CONDITIONS
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
56
Reason: In accordance with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. Details of any floodlighting or external illumination shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the building is occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and no other lighting shall be installed. Reason: To safeguard the visual/rural/residential amenities of the locality and to control overspill and light pollution in accordance with Policy GD1(ii)(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. No development shall commence until a scheme for the provision of foul and surface water drainage works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the building shall not be occupied until the drainage works to serve the development have been provided in accordance with the approved details.Reason: To ensure the satisfactory drainage of the site and to prevent water pollution in accordance with Policy GD1(x) of the Rother District Local Plan.
4. The development shall not be occupied until parking areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans and the areas shall thereafter be retained for that use and shall not be used other than for the parking of motor vehicles.Reason: To provide adequate on site parking facilities that do not prejudice the free flow of traffic and conditions of general safety along the highway and to accord with Policies GD1(i)(iii) and TR3 of the Rother District Local Plan.
5. The development shall not be occupied until a turning space for vehicles has been provided and constructed in accordance with the approved plans and the turning space shall thereafter be retained for that use and shall not be used for any other purpose.Reason: To ensure the safety of persons and vehicles entering and leaving the access and proceeding along the highway in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
6. The development shall not be occupied until cycle parking areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans and the areas shall thereafter be retained for that use and shall not be used other than for the parking of cycles.Reason: In order that the development site is accessible by non car modes and to meet the objectives of sustainable development in accordance with Policy TR2 of the Rother District Local Plan.
7. During any form of earthworks and/or excavations that are carried out as part of the development, suitable vehicle wheel washing equipment should be provided within the site, to the approval of the local planning authority, to prevent contamination and damage to the adjacent rods.Reason: In the interests of highway safety and for the benefit and convenience of the public at large
8. No works or development shall take place until full details of the proposed new retaining structure and all proposed tree planting, and the proposed times of planting, have been approved in writing by the local planning authority, and all tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with those details and at those times.
57
Reason: To safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
9. No development shall take place until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development reflects the character and/or appearance of the existing building and to preserve the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies GD1(iv)(v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
10. The use hereby permitted shall not be open to customers outside the following times 07:00 – 21:00. Reason: To protect the residential amenities and character of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(ii)(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan and having regard to PPG24, Annex 4.
11. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the local planning authority for a remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.Reason: There is the potential for unidentified contamination to exist on site.
12. Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstandings shall be passed through an oil interceptor with an overall capacity compatible with the site being drained.Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with Policy GD1(x) of the Rother District Local Plan.
13. The approved building shall not be used for the sale of convenience goods and shall be restricted to the sale of house and garden/bulky goods only.Reason: To ensure the proposed development has an acceptable retail impact and in accordance with Policy EM13 of the Rother District Local Plan.
14. The proposed mezzanine floor shall be used for the storage only and shall not be used for retail floorspace.Reason: To ensure the proposed development has an acceptable retail impact and in accordance with Policy EM13 of the Rother District Local Plan.
REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: The proposed retail building is sited within the developed site of the existing retail food store. The submitted planning and retail assessment demonstrates an acceptable retail impact and the proposal complies with Policy EM14 of the Rother District Local Plan. Location of the building within a corner of the site with the retention of the existing landscaped bund is acceptable and materials will match the existing building on the site. The proposal therefore complies with Policy GD1(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)
Case Officer: Mrs K West(Tel: 01424 787604)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: SALEHURST/ROBERTSBRIDGE
Ward Member: Councillor G E S HearnCouncillor Mrs S M Prochak
Reason for Committee consideration:Member referral: Councillor Mrs S M Prochak
Statutory 8 week date: 12 October 2009___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 Policy GD1 of the Rother District Local Plan applies to this proposal.___________________________________________________________________
2.0 SITE
2.1 This application site relates to the end of terrace Grade II listed property located on the west side of the High Street within the Robertsbridge Conservation Area and within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
4.1 This is a full planning application (RR/2009/1898/P) and Listed Building application (RR/2009/1920/L) for the erection of decking to the rear of the restaurant to provide space for smokers.
5.1.2 Director of Services – Environmental Health:“I confirm that I have visited the site and have concerns about the size (area) of the decking by a large number of patrons rather than just a few smokers would have potential for noise disturbance to those nearby residences particularly in the evenings and weekends.”
5.1.3 County Archaeologist:The County Archaeologist recommends a condition requiring a written scheme of investigation. (Comments can be read in full on the web site).
5.2 Re: Listed Building application RR/2009/1920/L:
5.2.1 Robertsbridge Parish Council:The Parish Council has no objection subject to the Conservation Officer’s agreement.
5.2.2 Historic Buildings Consultant:“Conservation and Design could not support the proposal for the erection of a timber deck to accommodate smokers; The building to which the decking would be attached is simple and utilitarian in its form and scale, the erection of a timber decking would not only impact upon the setting of the listed building but also discords with its character due to its domestic appearance. Whilst not shown there may be an intention to replace the existing door to incorporate vision panels/glazing which again is a domestic feature. The proposed location is within an existing car park and as such is considered to be out of context. As such, the proposal is considered detrimental to the architectural and historic character of the Listed Building contrary to policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan and government advice contained in PPG15.”
62
5.2.3 Director of Services – Environmental Health:“I confirm that I have visited the site and have concerns about the size (area) of the decking by a large number of patrons rather than just a few smokers would have potential for noise disturbance to those nearby residences particularly in the evenings and weekends.”
5.2.4 County Archaeologist:The County Archaeologist recommends a condition requiring a written scheme of investigation. (Comments can be read in full on the web site).
6.1 The following issues relate to this application:
Does the use of the decked area being utilised by patrons for smoking impact detrimentally on the residential amenities of the properties to the north and west of the site
Is the design and appearance of the decking and associated paraphernalia out of character with the setting of the listed building
Does the development preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Robertsbridge Conservation Area
Is the loss of at least 2 parking spaces by the creation of the decking acceptable
6.2 Use of the decked area
6.2.1 The close proximity of the existing houses to the north and west would result in unacceptable levels of noise and disturbance for the occupiers of those properties.
6.2.2 The Director of Services – Environmental Health has concerns about the size (area) of the decking and its use by a large number of patrons, particularly in the evenings and weekends.
6.3 Design and appearance
6.3.1 The decking is formal in its design and construction. The layout is large in area and in close proximity to the listed building. The Historic Buildings Consultant does not support the proposal.
6.4 Parking
6.4.1 The creation of the decking area will mean the loss of two parking spaces. In my opinion, although the creation of the decked area means the loss of two parking spaces, this will be negated by more available on street parking in the evenings.
7.1 This application relates to an existing commercial premises (restaurant). The proposed deck area to the rear will measure 5 metres in depth x 7.3 metres in width, narrowing at the southern end to 5.8 metres. It will extend out from the rear of the building stopping short of the restaurant entrance. Residential properties exist to the rear (west) and side (north).
7.2 The applicant has verbally confirmed that he calculates that on average approximately 10 smokers at any one time would be using the outside decking area. Consequently I conclude that the area does not need to be so large in area.
7.3 An area, I agree, does need to be provided; however I do not concur that the area needs to be so large and formal in its design and construction.
7.4 The design and appearance of the decking and associated paraphernalia is out of character with the setting of the listed building to which it relates.
7.5 The loss of parking is not unacceptable given the restaurant opening times (evenings).
7.6 In my opinion, the use of the decking for a smoking and amenity area for patrons of the restaurant in close proximity to neighbouring residential properties would result in a level of unacceptable noise and disturbance for the occupiers of those properties.
1. The use of the decking for a smoking amenity area for patrons of the restaurant, by reason of its close proximity to neighbouring residential properties, would result in an unacceptable level of noise and disturbance for the occupiers of those properties. It would therefore, seriously harm the living conditions of those affected. The development is contrary to Policy GD1(ii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
2. The design and appearance of the decking and associated paraphernalia is out of character with the setting of the listed building to which it relates and constitutes an incongruous suburban feature that is out of harmony with the existing historic building. The development does not therefore accord with the provisions of Section 66 of the Town & Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Aras) Act 1990 and moreover, does not accord with the
64
provision of Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan and government policy contained in Planning Policy guidance Note no.15, particularly paragraphs 3.3, 2.16 and 2.17, which indicate that full regard shall be given to the listed building and its setting.
3. The development does not preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area of Robertsbridge It therefore conflicts with the provisions of Section 72 of the Town & Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and moreover, does not accord with the provisions of Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan and Government policy contained in Planning Policy Guidance Note 15, particularly paragraphs 4.2, 4.14 and 4.16, which indicates that full regard shall be given to ensure that any new development accords with the area's special architectural and historic interest.
RR/2009/1920/L: REFUSE (LISTED BUILDING CONSENT)___________________________________________________________________
REASONS FOR REFUSAL:
1. The design and appearance of the decking and associated paraphernalia is out of character with the setting of the listed building to which it relates and constitutes an incongruous suburban feature that is out of harmony with the existing historic building. The development does not therefore accord with the provisions of Section 66 of the Town & Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Aras) Act 1990 and moreover, does not accord with the provision of Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan and government policy contained in Planning Policy guidance Note no.15, particularly paragraphs 3.3, 2.16 and 2.17, which indicate that full regard shall be given to the listed building and its setting.
2. The development does not preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area of Robertsbridge It therefore conflicts with the provisions of Section 72 of the Town & Country Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and moreover, does not accord with the provisions of Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan and Government policy contained in Planning Policy Guidance Note 15, particularly paragraphs 4.2, 4.14 and 4.16, which indicates that full regard shall be given to ensure that any new development accords with the area's special architectural and historic interest.
Ward Member: Councillor P OsborneCouncillor C N Ramus
Reason for Committee consideration:Head of Planning - by reason of the history of the site
Statutory 8 week date: 27 November 2009___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 Local Plan Policy GD1 apply and specifically (ii)(iii)(iv)(v) & (viii).___________________________________________________________________
2.0 SITE
2.1 The site lies to the south of the listed Bell Inn Public House and to the north of the recently constructed house, ‘Calembel’ approved under permission RR/2006/1203/P. The site was previously in the ownership of the public house and was used as part of the pub garden; however, this land was recently sold off from the public house and is currently under the ownership of the occupants of ‘Calembel’. The site has a road frontage of 20m onto the B2082 and a depth of some 45m, it is set within the development boundary for the village of Iden as defined within the Rother District Local Plan, and within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
2.2 There is a mature walnut tree close to the north boundary, which is the subject of a Tree Preservation Order.
3.1 RR/95/329/P Change of use and conversion of storage barn to visitor accommodation – Approved Conditional.
3.2 RR/95/397/L Conversion of storage barn to visitor accommodation – Listed BC Granted.
3.3 RR/2006/1203/P Erection of two storey three bedroom dwelling with detached garage and formation of new vehicular access – Approved Conditional.
3.4 RR/2007/1303/P Alterations of position of vehicular access to serve proposed new house from position agreed in planning permission RR/2006/1203/P – Approved Conditional.
3.5 RR/2008/3233/P Proposed new dwelling with formation of new vehicular access – Withdrawn.
4.1This application seeks permission for the erection of a two storey detached dwelling with first floor accommodation partially accommodated within the roof space. The dwelling is set outside of the root protection area of the walnut tree covered by the TPO.
4.2A new shared vehicular access is proposed, to serve Calembel and the new proposed development. This vehicular access is to be formed by the widening of the existing vehicular access serving Calembel, currently 3m in width.
4.3 Supporting Documents: Tree Protection Report.___________________________________________________________________
5.0 CONSULTATIONS
5.1 Parish Council: Strongly objects to the proposal. See full comments in the separate APPENDIX DOCUMENT relating to this Committee 19 November 2009.Summarised below are the main points: Background to the present situation – The applicant previously owned the
Bell Public house and prior to its sale transferred the land on which Calembel is built and the application site into a separate Land Registry title.
In view if the way the transfer was done, the public and Parish Council were not given any opportunity to object to the loss of an important village amenity.
Application site was an integral part of the garden of the public house, a grade 2 listed building.
68
A change of use of the plot is required and that this land remains the garden of the public house.
Advice form English Heritage and consideration of sections 2.4, 2.12 and 2.8 of PPG15.
We ask that you refuse change of use for this site irrespective of ownership.
Closeness of the proposed building to the Bell PH from a health and safety aspect together with the environmental impact.
Access – effect additional vehicles entering and exiting the road at this point will have on safety at this bend in the road, considering its proximity to a bus stop used by school buses, and to the junction of Main Street and Church Lane.
Do not wish to see this part of village become cluttered with buildings that visually harm the centre of this Doomsday Village.
Deprives the community from using the Public House garden. Unsuitable infilling and over development. Adverse impact upon the setting of the grade 2 listed Bell Inn. Loss of amenity open space – the site provides a natural visual break in
the street scene and contributes towards the setting of the village.
5.2 Highway Authority: Recommend that any consent shall include conditions. It is evident that this application proposes to utilise the existing access at Calembel and widen it to a minimum of 5.5m into a shared access arrangement. It is evident that this will provide visibility splays of 2.4m x 52m which I specified were required in a previous application, taking into account the actual speed of traffic along this point of the B2082.
5.3 Planning Notice: 34 letters of objection have been received concerned with the following: One house in pub garden is bad enough. A second, on a dangerous bend
in the road, will complete the destruction of the centre of the village. The parcels of land were separated into different land registry deed by the
previous owner of The Bell. Limited outdoor amenity space now at The Bell. The Bell needs room to expand, if this land were to be developed, that
could never happen. It is a fact that The Bell cannot continue to be viable, if it is denied the opportunity to expand.
Could result in the loss of the last public house in the village. An extension was granted in 1988, but not implemented, we wish to retain
the right to re-apply for the same plans, to meet our future needs. Whoever has the legal right to the land should not be a consideration in
this planning application. If the Council were to insist the land remains a pub garden, a future owner may well be inclined to sell it back to The Bell, as without planning consent it has little value.
Future occupants of the proposed dwelling will be likely to suffer an unacceptable level of noise and disturbance, by virtue of the close proximity to the public house and beer garden.
First floor windows in the rear of the proposed property will have direct sight into the bed and breakfast accommodation at The Bell.
Views into the bathroom of The Bell.
69
If an application was submitted to build a public house next to a residential property, then an environmental health officer would be lodging an objection, so surely it is only fair that the Planning Committee ask environmental health to comment on the possible effects of this application being granted.
Future occupants of the house could complain about noise, disturbance and the extract smells from the pub.
Dwelling may be too close to the LPG Tank to meet safety regulations. The development would form part of the background view of the Grade 2
listed public house, which is often photographed from the front by tourists. This affects the character of the building which is an important centre piece to the village. The proposed development will result in the loss of a visual break of the street scene, which is essential to the preservation of the character of the local area. The proposed development of this site will result in a continuous run of buildings, giving the public house a less prominent position.
Plan does not show any protection for the listed natural spring well. This forms part of the listed building grounds, and should not be demolished or covered over without listed consent.
Serious concerns about road safety, close to this dangerous bend. Does not provide affordable housing. Detrimental to local economy – development would be just 13 metres in
front of the dwellings that are let as bed and breakfast units. This proposal would make these units unlettable, which would result in a loss of trade to the parish.
Visual impact detrimental to the area. Overdevelopment of the site. Within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Iden is a listed ‘Doomsday Village’. Off road parking – visually unattractive, the whole of the front area of the
property would be a driveway. The area was and should still be the garden of the pub. The open green space around a pub provides an essential buffer. Another house in this central area will change the character of our village
centre forever. Impact upon the protected tree. Contrary to PPS7. PPG15 requires you to ‘have special regard to the desirability of
preserving any listed building or its setting’. No change of use of this land has occurred. Contrary to Policy GD1. Higher density of building than is suitable for this part of the village. The Bell pub is an important amenity for the village. Existing dwelling out of keeping. Status of a footpath across the site. You would never allow a pub to be built so close to a dwelling, so why
allow a dwelling so near a pub. Loss of amenity and leisure land in the centre of a rural village. Will overshadow the Bell Inn.
70
The owners of the Bell Inn submitted a copy of a refused application and appeal in another part of the country which he considered to be similar to the current application. (See separate APPENDIX DOCUMENT relating to this Committee 19 November 2009.)
A letter from the agent in response to the objections received: The proposal site is no longer in the ownership of the Bell Inn and
therefore the reputed need for this land to be saved for ‘possible’ future expansion plans for the Bell Inn is inappropriate.
The proposal site no longer forms part of the Bell Inn curtilage and has not been used by the pub since 2007. To suggest therefore that the re-development of the site would affect trade and consequently result in the loss if the pub to the village is also inappropriate.
Proposed dwelling is purposely sited a reasonable distance from the public house and its various amenities to mitigate any possible conflict between the two uses.
Proposed dwelling sited in excess of 18m from the existing extract installation and would be adequately distant to not be affected by any odour or noise nuisance from a correctly installed system.
The current owner of the Bell Inn has cited a previous refused application, elsewhere in the country, as a precedent for a refusal decision for this application. The circumstances and consequently the reason for refusal, of this other scheme are quite different from the current proposal.
The proposed dwelling design incorporates traditional features and materials in keeping with its setting and the local vernacular.
The protected walnut tree provides a significant visual barrier between the proposed dwelling and the listed building adjacent.
The siting of the plot to the rear of the listed building, also eliminates any detrimental impact on the setting of the listed building.
A comprehensive tree protection specification has been submitted with the application, in full compliance with the requirements of BS 5837:2005.
The location of the existing ‘spring’ well is noted on the submitted proposed site plan. The proposed dwelling construction will not conflict with the existing well construction.
Proposed vehicular access, parking arrangement and off road turning facilities are in compliance with the current ‘Manual for Street’.
6.1.1 The site lies within the development boundary for Iden as defined within the Rother District Local Plan and the land has now been separated from the adjoining public house. In principle new residential development would be acceptable within development boundaries subject to meeting the objectives of Local Plan Policies. The main issues which need to be considered are; the impact on the protected walnut tree, highway safety, design and scale of dwelling, impact on neighbours’ amenities and setting of listed building.
71
6.2 Protected tree
6.2.1 Given the relocated position of the proposed dwelling adjacent to the protected walnut tree, careful consideration of its impact upon this tree needs to be assessed. Comments are still awaited from the Council’s Landscape Officer.
6.3 Highway safety
6.3.1 I note the concerns raised with regard to highway safety, however the Highway Authority have been consulted and they raise no objection. See full comments above.
6.4 Design and scale of dwelling
6.4.1 In terms of the plot size it is of a similar or larger scale than those in the immediate vicinity and, in itself, is adequate to accommodate the proposed dwelling and provide adequate amenity space. In order to fit a dwelling on the site avoiding the Root Protection Area of the tree it has been necessary to design an L-shaped dwelling in floor plan. As a result the extended front living room with bedroom above under a full two storey roof would give a somewhat incongruous appearance from the road although this does not create a poor design.
6.4.2 Given the restricted developable area of the plot and the need to facilitate
parking and turning areas within the site, much of the front area will have to be given over to driveway, parking and turning area behind the existing boundary hedge. While I note the adjacent village hall and public house have larger areas of hardstandings these are not residential properties, and the large expanse of proposed surfaced area adjacent to the highway is not the most attractive parking solution. While I would expect a detached house in this location to be provided with a garage, this is not a specific requirement but it does mean that the open parking arrangement creates a harsh more urban feature in contrast to neighbouring residential dwellings, which have more spacious front gardens and more limited areas of hard surface which more befits the village character.
6.5 Impact on amenities of neighbouring properties
6.5.1 Unlike the previous withdrawn scheme RR/2008/3233/P the proposed dwelling has been sited adjacent to the protected walnut tree and Calembel, increasing the distance from the B&B units in the public house curtilage to some 13m. This is sufficient distance to prevent demonstrable harm to their amenities.
6.6 Setting of listed building
6.6.1 While advice in PPG15 states, that the setting is often an essential part of the building’s character, in this instance given the siting of the proposed dwelling
72
to the rear of the listed building and the separation afforded (17m) it is not considered that it would cause demonstrable harm to its setting.
6.7 Other matters
6.7.1 The land in question is no longer part of the public house’s garden, and therefore would not result in the loss of amenity space as the public house no longer has the legal right to use it as such. In this respect the public house retains sufficient curtilage.
6.7.2 PPG 24: ‘Planning and Noise’ paragraph 12 states, “When determining planning applications for development which will be exposed to existing noise sources, local planning authorities should consider both the likely level of noise exposure at the time of the application and any increase that may reasonably be expected in the foreseeable future”. It then goes on to state in Annexe 3 that commercial development such as public houses pose particular difficulties, not least because activities are often at their peak in the evening and late at night, and that it is not only the noise generated within the premises but also attendant problems of noise that may be made by customers in the vicinity. The Bell Inn abuts residential dwellings to the west and I am not aware of any complaints having been received in the past, therefore potential noise disturbance to any future occupants could not be a justified reason for refusal on its own.
7.1 The plot is similar or larger in size than those in the immediate vicinity and might be considered adequate in size to accommodate the proposed dwelling and provide adequate amenity space, while maintaining sufficient distance to preserve the residential amenities of neighbouring properties.
7.2 The proposed dwelling is sited to the rear of the listed Bell Inn and is separated by a distance of some 17m and the protected walnut tree, it is not therefore considered to cause demonstrable harm to the setting of the listed building.
7.3 Given the restricted developable area of the plot and the need to facilitate parking and turning areas within the site, the area to the front of the proposed dwelling would be largely taken over by hard surfacing and car parking. This would bring about a substantial change to the character of this part of the village and constitute a more urban feature in contrast to neighbouring residential dwellings, which have more spacious front gardens and more limited areas of hard surface. As such the proposal would be contrary to the objectives of Policy GD1(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
1. The developable area of the site is restricted by the protected walnut tree. In order to accommodate sufficient parking and turning areas on site a large proportion of the area in front of the proposed dwelling would be hard surfacing. This would bring about a substantial change to the character of this part of the village and constitute a more urban feature in contrast to neighbouring residential dwellings, which have more spacious front gardens and more limited areas of hard surface and the village character in general. As such the proposal would be contrary to the objectives of Policy GD1(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Planning Committee 19 November 2009___________________________________________________________________
RR/2009/1902/P TICEHURST The Bell Hotel, High Street
Demolition of existing 1930s wing to hotel. Proposed extensions to north and west elevations. Internal alterations to existing hotel. Proposed 3 detached guest lodges and external works. Proposed 2 houses with associated parking.
RR/2009/1943/L TICEHURST The Bell Hotel, High Street
Demolition of existing 1930s wing to hotel. Proposed extensions to north and west elevations. Internal alterations to existing hotel
Case Officer: Mr Mark Cathcart (Tel: 01424 787613)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: TICEHURST
Ward Member: Councillor R EllistonCouncillor I Jenkins
Reason for Committee consideration: Deferred by Planning Committee 15.10.2009
Statutory 8 week date: 23 September 2009 ___________________________________________________________________
These applications were included on the list of Committee site inspections for 13 October 2009. The applications were deferred at the 15 October 2009 Committee meeting for discussions with the applicant’s agent regarding revisions to the scheme and the submission of amended plans. The required amendments are principally in relation to conservation and design issues and comprise the following:
Internal alterations with a view towards retention of historic fabric Simplification of the design of the eastern extension – including the deletion of
the balcony Design amendments to the extension to the rear of the assembly rooms Re-align the guest lodges on a north-south axis Re-design the proposed two dwellings to give a more traditional character and
appearance
76
The roof connections between the extensions and the existing building The design and layout of the car park and the footpath link___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 The Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservations Areas) Act 1990 requires that all new development must preserve or enhance a conservation area. The Act also requires that in considering proposals for new development, a local planning authority shall give special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. In addition to this, Policy GD1(viii) of the Rother District Local Plan requires that new development shall not prejudice the character, appearance of setting of heritage features, including listed buildings and conservation areas.
1.2 In considering the planning application RR/2009/1902/P Policy GD1(ii)(iii)(iv) and (v) is also relevant. This requires that all new development protects neighbouring amenity, does not create unacceptable highway conditions and does not detract from the character and appearance of the locality, including the AONB.
2.1 The applications relate to The Bell Inn, a 17th century timber framed building listed within Grade II, which occupies a prominent position within the Ticehurst Conservation Area. The commercial premises have been closed for a number of years and the building is vacant. The small public house car park stands to the front and side of the building (opposite The Square) and there is a garden to the sides and rear. The two storey addition attached to the eastern side of the main inn building originally was used as a ground floor coach house and an assembly room above.
2.2 To the east of The Bell Inn are Bell Cottages which date from the 18 th century and are also listed in Grade II. The east elevation of these cottages adjoins Pickforde Lane, a narrow country lane which leads in a northerly direction from the centre of the village from the B2099. To the north of Bell Cottages is a two storey weather boarded building (1 Pickforde Lane and ‘Wellend’) which dates from the early 19th century and is also listed in Grade II. This weather boarded building is sited immediately adjacent to the rear edge of the footway on the western side of Pickforde Lane. The rear elevation of these dwellings looks across part of the application site. To the north of the application site is the Rother District Council car park in Pickforde Lane.
3.1 RR/2007/930/P Erection of one pair of two storey, semi-detached dwellings with provision of a new vehicular access and
77
four parking spaces and alteration to an existing access – land forming part of the former public house vegetable garden, next to ‘Wellend’, Pickforde Lane – Refused. A subsequent appeal was dismissed for the reasons (briefly) – the effect on the Ticehurst Conservation Area and the harm to the residential amenities of ‘Wellend’.
4.1 An extension to the two storey coach house/assembly room building to create a new access and disability toilet
The demolition of the existing C20 single storey wing and the erection of a two storey extension to provide an enlarged bar dining area, WCs on the ground floor, a new staircase, and new guest bedrooms at first floor
The erection of 3 single storey outbuildings (timber cladding and clay roof tiles) to provide 4 additional guest rooms with en-suite
The erection of 2 new semi-detached (3 and 4 bed) town houses fronting Pickforde Lane and within the former vegetable garden next to ‘Wellend’
Alterations to the car park and access including the provision of a pedestrian link from High Street through to the Pickforde Lane (RDC) car park
A total of 14 on-site car parking places would be provided, 4 of which would be to serve the two new houses
Sunken courtyard gardens Additional internal alterations are proposed as follows:-
– Alterations to bedrooms to provide en-suite bathrooms– Provision of a satellite kitchen– Refurbishment of existing kitchen– Alterations to bar– Rear access to gardens
Finally, it is also proposed to carry out work of repair to the structure and fabric of the building
4.2 The commercial part of development would result in a total of 11 guest rooms being formed, an enlarged bar/dining area/meeting room with 60+ covers indicated on the plans, a function room within the old assembly room with 80 covers indicated.
5.1 Parish Council:- Support the proposal. “This was felt to be an exciting and vibrant project in the middle of the village with a good innovative design that is sympathetic with the original. Reservations were expressed about the number of external buildings but it was appreciated that good quality accommodation was needed – a 106 agreement tying those new buildings to the main Inn was recommended. Materials to be sympathetic with original.”
78
5.2 Highway Authority:- Recommends that any consent shall include attached highway condition re access, parking provision and turning areas.Notes have also been provided, which include the following comments on parking:-
“Having read through the design and access statement it is evident that 14 car parking spaces are to be provided on site with four of them being designated to the proposed dwellings. While I would wish to express concern regarding the proposed number of parking spaces compared with the proposed increase in use, I feel that this argument would be difficult to justify when comparing the existing levels of car parking to the existing permitted use.
I have also considered the well utilised public car park while formulating my response. The proposed use of the site will result in the majority of visitors arriving in the evenings. It is fair to assume that there is likely to be more spaces available within the public car park during these times. While I would not wish to see the existing car park monopolised by potential users of the Bell Inn, I feel that it is logical to utilise the existing car park while it is not at its capacity.
It is also evident that avenues are being explored by the applicant to extend the existing car park. While the Highway Authority would support any forthcoming application I cannot consider this as part of this application at present.
I have also considered that a representative number of customers are likely to be local who are unlikely to require a car parking space.”
5.3 Environment Agency:- In the event that planning permission is granted the Agency requires a planning condition (specified) dealing with any contamination that may be present on the site.
5.4 Southern Water Services:- Does not wish to comment.
5.5 Director of Transport & Environment – County Archaeologist:- In the event that planning permission is granted an archaeological condition is requested.
5.6 Director of Services – Environmental Health:- (summarised) – Request conditions in respect of odour control equipment and noise insulation. Further information is requested on the use of the function room. The hours for ‘licensable activities’ for a nearby public house are generally 10am – 11pm.
5.7 Planning Notice:- 7 emails/letters of support from local residents (summarised): Development will be a considerable asset to the village Will enhance the appearance of the central square Provide both a social hub and a source of local employment Construction of the residential properties may not be ideal but without
them it must be recognised that the business is unlikely to be financially viable
79
Parking is an issue, although better access to the car park may improve matters
What is the other alternative ... let it deteriorate and fall down Site has become an eyesore right in the middle of the village Only real issue that we can see is the car parking This public house needs to be regenerated and Ticehurst needs its pub
back at the centre of the village As there is no staff accommodation proposed within main building, the
proposed semi-detached houses must be treated as an integral part of the scheme and used as staff accommodation, tied to the hotel by a planning agreement.
5 emails/letters of objection from local residents and the CPRE: Whilst supporting the principle of regenerating the village pub there are
several objections to the application There are inadequate parking provisions for a sustainable pub, restaurant
and function room on this scale Building two houses and lodges on this plot takes up any space which
could otherwise be used for staff and customer parking Parking spaces in or near the village centre (including Pickforde Lane Car
Park) are already used at capacity The proposed opening hours for the pub, declared on the application form
are wholly unsuitable for a large venue in a quiet but densely populated rural village. 01:30 am is proposed for Fridays and Saturdays (12:30 am other days). Even a wedding disco of say 80 guests leaving at that time would cause a disturbance.
The Ticehurst Parish Council held their Planning Committee meeting without giving notice to the public of the meeting venue, time and date. Their views do not represent the interests of many residents close by.
Inadequate on-site parking. The capacity of the Inn, excluding standing customers, would appear to be:– 40 at outside tables to the rear– 20 at outside tables to the front– 52 seated within the bar/dining areas– 80 guests in the function roomThis gives a total of 192 customers which, even if reduced to 100, would almost certainly generate a parking requirement for 40 cars
I object to any demolition of any part of The Bell Inn.
1 email of general observation: Welcomes the renovation of The Bell but it is unacceptable for a hotel in
the middle of a village to remain open after midnight.___________________________________________________________________
6.0 APPRAISAL
6.1 At the previous Planning Committee meeting Members were generally supportive of the application proposals and instructed that further negotiations take place with the applicant’s agent with a view towards seeking resolution of a number of points of concern. Following on from a meeting at The Bell with
80
the applicant and agent and the subsequent submission of draft revised plans, fully detailed drawings are now being prepared based on the amendments discussed; it is anticipated that these will be available in time for your meeting. Principal issues are as follows:
West Wing extension6.2 The front balcony has now been deleted and the design of this elevation has
been simplified. It would now appear rather more subservient to the main building. The agent considers that the rear elevation treatment of the west wing extension is distinct enough from the rest of the building so as to be viewed in isolation and accordingly, has chosen to keep this as set out on the originally submitted plans and drawings.
Rear extension to the Assembly Room6.3 This has been fundamentally changed and has been given a contemporary
design with a flat roof. The Conservation and Design Officer has indicated that a modern approach to the extension to this part of the building would not be inappropriate. However some design concerns have been raised about the adjacent flat roof link with the main building; the agent has given consideration to this but is unable to amend this aspect of the design as it is necessary to accommodate a wheelchair refuge area that is a requirement of the Building Regulations.
Internal Alterations6.4 The revisions that have been put forward have gone some way towards
meeting the requests of Conservation and Design. However, due to the existing internal configuration of the building it has not been possible to give access to the attic stairs from the new wing. It is now proposed to provide a flat roof to the link to facilitate access without impinging unduly on the main roof.
The Guest Lodges6.5 These have now been realigned north-south in accordance with the request
made by Conservation and Design. Further information (photographs) is to be submitted to illustrate the design of the proposed timber latticework feature on the end gable walls.
Car park and pedestrian link6.6 This has been redesigned and the proposed pedestrian footpath is now
shown to take a more direct route alongside the existing public house building and the proposed new guest lodges. The agent is presently in negotiations with the Council’s Legal Section regarding the proposed pedestrian link with the Rother District Council car park.
Proposed new houses6.7 A drawing (3D image) of the revised houses has been received. The
contemporary design has now been replaced by an ‘arts and crafts’ style. It is considered that, in principle, this design approach would allow the development to assimilate rather more readily with the traditional and vernacular architecture in the Conservation Area. On the basis of the drawing
81
provided it has not, however, been possible to assess the potential impact of the new built development on the neighbouring listed cottages. In this respect, detailed plans of the proposed two new houses are now being prepared by the agent and it is expected that these will be available in time for your meeting.
Other matters6.8 The Environmental Health Division has commented that other licensed
premises in the area are subject to 11:00pm closing time. In response to this the agent has indicated that there are no restrictions imposed by planning on the existing premises and this is a matter that should be left to the Licensing Authorities.
7.1 There are recognised merits in the scheme to refurbish and reopen The Bell Inn and the revisions address many of the points of concern previously raised, particularly in respect of the impact on listed buildings and the Conservation Area. Further plans are, however, still awaited in respect of the two new houses. These will need to demonstrate that there would be no material adverse impact on the occupiers of the neighbouring listed building – ‘Wellend’. Subject to consideration of the outstanding plans and the imposition of conditions to cover matters of details, the applications can be supported.
RR/2009/1902/P: GRANT (FULL PLANNING) DELEGATED (AMENDED PLANS)___________________________________________________________________
CONDITIONS
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of:- the extensions to the existing building (including flat roof areas), - the guest lodges,- the two new dwellings,- any new walls,- any external hard landscaping’
82
have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development reflects the character and/or appearance of the existing building and to preserve the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies GD1 (iv) (v) & (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. The landscape design proposals for the areas around the Bell Inn shown on the submitted site layout plan are not hereby approved. No development shall take place on any part of the site until alternative hard and soft landscaping details for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, together with a time table for implementation. These works shall be carried out as approved. The submitted details shall include:- means of enclosure (including full details of the height, design and
appearance of any dividing walls or retaining walls). - existing vegetation to be retained and full details of the layout of new areas
of soft landscaping to be created within the grounds of The Bell Inn. This shall include a planting plan with a schedule of plants/trees, noting species, plant sizes and positions.
- minor artefacts and structures (eg. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc.)
- retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant.
Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) & (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
4. Prior to any new or replacement window and door joinery being installed details of the design and appearance of the proposed windows/doors shall be submitted for the consideration and approval of the local planning authority. These details shall include elevation drawings at a scale of 1:10 and full size section drawings through cills and frames, including glazing bars and mullions and showing the relationship to the existing structure. Only those approved details shall be employed within the development and they shall be thereafter retained.
Reason: To safeguard the historic fabric and architectural character of the listed building in accordance with Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
83
5. Prior to any new or replacement roof-lights being installed within The Bell Inn details of the size, style, design and appearance of the proposed roof-lights shall be submitted for the consideration and approval of the local planning authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing within the local planning authority, no existing rafters or other timbers are to be cut to facilitate the insertion of the roof-lights. In principle, the local planning authority would expect any roof-lights to be sized and positioned so as to fit in between the existing, retained rafters. Furthermore, any roof-lights should be in the form of appropriate ‘conservation’ style roof-lights. Only those approved details shall be employed within the development and they shall be thereafter retained.Reason: To safeguard the historic fabric and architectural character of the listed building in accordance with Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
6. No floodlighting or other external means of illumination of The Bell Inn shall be provided, installed or operated at the site, except in accordance with a detailed scheme which shall have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policies GD1 (iv) & (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
7. The altered access shall be in the position shown on the submitted plan and constructed in accordance with the attached HT407 diagram. All works undertaken shall be shall be executed and completed by the applicant in accordance with the approved details prior to development being brought into use.
Reason: In the interests of road safety and to accord with the requirements of the Director of Transport and Environment of East Sussex in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Note: To give effect to this condition you should contact the Transport and Environment Department of East Sussex County Council at Sidley Depot, Ninfield Road, Bexhill TN39 5AA (Telephone 0845 6080193) prior to the commencement of work and enter a Private Works agreement between yourself and the County Council.
8. No building shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plan drawing no. [final drawing awaited] date stamped [final drawing awaited] for 14 number of cars to be parked and it shall thereafter be retained for those purposes only.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or conditions of general safety along the highway in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
9. Before the use of The Bell Inn hereby permitted commences, details of a scheme (including the design and external appearance of any extractor duct/flue) for the mechanical ventilation of the working area and for the
84
filtration of grease and cooking odours shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter continued (with all equipment being operated, maintained and replaced as need be), unless further written approval from the local planning authority for an alternative scheme is gained.
Reason: To protect the residential amenities of the locality and to safeguard the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(ii) (iv) (v) and (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
10. Before the use hereby permitted commences, a scheme for the sound insulation of the mechanical ventilation equipment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the sound insulation works shall be completed prior to operation of the ventilation equipment. The sound insulation shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To protect the residential amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(ii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
11. No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation, including a timetable for the investigation, which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: The works are likely to disturb remains of archaeological interest and to accord with Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
12. Before occupation of the buildings commences, details of the siting and form of bins for the storage and recycling of refuse within the site (internally or externally), and a collection point, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the approved details shall be implemented and thereafter continued, with all bins and containers available for use, maintained and replaced as need be.
Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the locality and in the interests of providing a sustainable development in accordance with Policy GD1 (iv) of the Rother District Local Plan and PPS1, paragraph 20.
13. If during development, contamination is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the local planning authority for, a remediation strategy detailing how this contamination shall be dealt with.
Reason: The previous use of the site may have left contamination which could pose a risk to the environment. Also, to accord with Policy GD1 (xiii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
85
Note:(i) Amended plans (to be submitted).
REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: There are recognised merits in the scheme to re-open The Bell Inn in terms of contributing to the economy of the rural area and the provision of a community facility that benefits the vitality of the village. The refurbishment of the fabric of The Bell Inn also safeguards its preservation as a listed building. The extensions to The Bell Inn and associated free standing buildings in the grounds, are in keeping with the listed building and its setting and would enhance or preserve the character and appearance of the Ticehurst Conservation Area. The layout, scale, design, and external appearance of the scheme are also considered acceptable in terms of the potential impact of the development on the residential amenities of dwellings in the vicinity of the site. Finally the Highway Authority has been consulted on the application and considers that the traffic implications of the scheme in terms of access and on site parking provision would also be acceptable. The application accords with the provisions of Policy GD1 (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
RR/2009/1943/L: GRANT (LISTED BUILDING CONSENT) DELEGATED (AMENDED PLANS)___________________________________________________________________
CONDITIONS
1. The work to which this consent relates shall be begun before the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this consent is granted.Reason: In accordance with section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of:- the extensions to the existing building (including flat roof areas), - the guest lodges,- the two new dwellings,- any new walls,- any external hard landscaping’have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development reflects the character and/or appearance of the existing building and to preserve the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies GD1 (iv) (v) & (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. The landscape design proposals for the areas around the Bell Inn shown on the submitted site layout plan are not hereby approved. No development shall take place on any part of the site until alternative hard and soft landscaping details for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, together with a time table for implementation. These works shall be carried out as approved. The submitted details shall include:- means of enclosure (including full details of the height, design and
appearance of any dividing walls or retaining walls). - existing vegetation to be retained and full details of the layout of new areas
of soft landscaping to be created within the grounds of The Bell Inn. This shall include a planting plan with a schedule of plants/trees, noting species, plant sizes and positions.
- minor artefacts and structures (eg. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc.)
- retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant.
Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) & (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
4. Prior to any new or replacement window and door joinery being installed details of the design and appearance of the proposed windows/doors shall be submitted for the consideration and approval of the local planning authority. These details shall include elevation drawings at a scale of 1:10 and full size section drawings through cills and frames, including glazing bars and mullions and showing the relationship to the existing structure. Only those approved details shall be employed within the development and they shall be thereafter retained.Reason: To safeguard the historic fabric and architectural character of the listed building in accordance with Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
5. Prior to any new or replacement roof-lights being installed within The Bell Inn details of the size, style, design and appearance of the proposed roof-lights shall be submitted for the consideration and approval of the local planning authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing within the local planning authority, no existing rafters or other timbers are to be cut to facilitate the insertion of the roof-lights. In principle, the local planning authority would expect any roof-lights to be sized and positioned so as to fit in between the existing, retained rafters. Furthermore, any roof-lights should be in the form of appropriate ‘conservation’ style roof-lights. Only those approved details shall be employed within the development and they shall be thereafter retained.Reason: To safeguard the historic fabric and architectural character of the listed building in accordance with Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
6. No works shall be carried out in respect of the roof of The Bell Inn until the following details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local
87
planning authority and the works thereafter shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details:- 1:10 scale drawings illustrating proposed eaves and ridge detailing,
indicating the provision of eaves and ridge level ventilation and the specification of any roofing felt and insulation where proposed.
Reason: To ensure that special regard is paid in the interests of protecting special architectural and historic character and detailing of the listed building in accordance with Policy GD1(viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
7. Prior to its installation, sectional details showing the impact of the dumb-waiter into the historic floor of The Bell Inn shall be submitted for the consideration of the local planning authority. The details will be required to demonstrate that its insertion would not have a harmful impact on the historic and structural integrity of the listed building. This development shall only be carried out as agreed with the local planning authority.Reason: To ensure that special regard is paid in the interests of protecting special architectural and historic character and detailing of the listed building in accordance with Policy GD1(viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
8. No floodlighting or other external means of illumination of The Bell Inn shall be provided, installed or operated at the site, except in accordance with a detailed scheme which shall have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with Policies GD1 (iv) & (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
9. Before the use of The Bell Inn hereby permitted commences, details of a scheme (including the design and external appearance of any extractor duct/flue) for the mechanical ventilation of the working area and for the filtration of grease and cooking odours shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter continued (with all equipment being operated, maintained and replaced as need be), unless further written approval from the local planning authority for an alternative scheme is gained. Reason: To protect the visual amenities of the locality and the character of the listed building in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) and (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Note:(i) Amended plans (to be submitted).
REASONS FOR GRANTING LISTED BUILDING CONSENT: The refurbishment of the fabric of The Bell Inn safeguards its preservation as a listed building. The extensions to The Bell Inn and associated free standing buildings in the grounds, are in keeping with the listed building and its setting and would enhance or preserve the character and appearance of the building within the Ticehurst Conservation Area. The layout, scale, design, and external appearance of the scheme are also considered acceptable in terms of the need to safe guard the setting of the listed building. The application accords with Policy GD1 (viii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Case Officer: Mr Mark Cathcart (Tel: 01424 787613)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: TICEHURST
Ward Member: Councillor I JenkinsCouncillor R Elliston
Reason for Committee consideration: Head of Planning – Previous appeal decision
Statutory 8 week date: 27 November 2009___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 The site is within the Development Boundary for Stonegate as identified in the Rother District Local Plan. Policy DS3 of the Plan states that the majority of all new development will take place within the Development Boundaries of existing settlements.
1.2 Policy EM2 of the Plan states that proposals to change the use of employment land will be resisted unless it is demonstrated that there is no prospect of its continued use for business purposes or that it would perpetuate serious harm to residential amenities. In the event of the above qualification being met, the Policy states that consideration will be given to a mixed-use development in accordance with Policies EM1, DS1 and GD1.
1.3 Policies GD1 and DS1 set out the general development criteria that all new development should meet. This includes protection of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
2.1 This roughly triangular shaped site (approximately 0.144ha) is within the settlement of Stonegate and occupies the corner between Lymden Lane and the Cottenden Road. It is presently occupied as the builders yard premises of Hodder and Sons Ltd. A detached two storey late Victorian building originally built as a dwelling house is occupied as the business office. The other significant building on the site is a single storey storage building (12m x 4.8m). Almost all the site area is concrete hardstanding, some of which is utilised as outside storage and car parking. There is a mature oak tree on the corner. Next to the site are the small business units comprising ‘Stonegate Business Centre’. Both sites taken together have a history of commercial use – previous uses include a depot of SCATS (agricultural trade suppliers).
3.1 Originally a blacksmiths forge, there have been a number of commercial/business uses on the site. The following planning applications are relevant:
3.2 RR/2004/881/P Demolition of existing buildings, erection of 4 no 2 bedroom mews style cottages and replacement offices with alteration to existing access – Refused – Appeal Dismissed.
3.3 RR/2008/517/P Demolition of existing buildings and proposed redevelopment for 4 x 2 bedroom semi-detached cottages, shop and offices with provision of 10 parking spaces and alteration to existing accesses. Refused – Appeal Dismissed.
4.1 The application is a revised resubmission of RR/2008/517/P above. It proposes the demolition of the existing buildings on the site and the redevelopment of the site for a mixed use comprising residential and an office/workshop.
4.2 The plans show the erection of two pairs of semi-detached (brick and tile) 2 bedroom cottages fronting Cottenden Road and a detached (weatherboard and tile) house (3 bedroom) side-on to Lymden Lane. These would be served by the existing corner access. Also proposed is a detached, 2 storey office/workshop building served by a separate (existing) access with the adjacent units at the ‘Stonegate Business Centre’. The office/workshop building is shown to be timber clad with a clay tile roof and has been designed to incorporate a glazed, full height ‘wagon-way’ feature. The plans show the provision of 6 no. parking spaces to serve the houses and 5 no. spaces with the workshop/office.
5.1 Parish Council:- Any comments will be reported.
5.2 Highway Authority:- Would wish to attach highway conditions in the event that planning permission is granted. Notes have also been provided in respect of desired highway improvements and off-site works (see website for full text).
5.3 Environment Agency:- Any comments will be reported.
5.4 Southern Water Services:- Any comments will be reported.
5.5 Director of Services – Environmental Health:- Any comments will be reported.
5.6 Planning Notice:- 8 letters of objection (summarised) – Limited parking facilities are proposed within the development for
visitors/delivery/utility vehicles. The problem of alternative roadside parking will arise.
Customer car parking for the adjacent industrial units will also be reduced. This will again, add to pressure for on-street parking.
The site should be retained for business purposes in accordance with Policy EM2 of the Local Plan.
Offers to buy the site for commercial purposes have been made, but have not been pursued by the applicant or selling agent.
The proposed building would form a large bulk of development. The development would dominate the centre of the village. Would detract from the attractive appearance of the centre of the village.
Properties on the opposite side of Lymden Lane are listed. Could significantly increase traffic hazards in the immediate vicinity of the
site. There has not been any advertising since the first offer was rejected.
People thought it had been taken off the market. Surely a ‘For Sale’ board should have been displayed.
The proposed housing development would overlook my cottage (Wayside, Lymden Lane) and result in loss of privacy.
Also concerned about the increased noise levels as the proposed rear garden will be opposite my cottage.
Additional housing would not benefit the local community I would support local applications to purchase the land and build a
farmshop/café. Access to the existing workshop units will be severely restricted. The proposed development will remove all my current allocated parking
facilities (The Forge-Garage). If customers have difficulty accessing my business and are unable to park outside this will seriously affect my livelihood.
The proposed parking areas for the workshop/office building will impose on my right of way.
A letter from Thomson Snell & Passmore (Solicitors) states that they act for Mr Stephen Burley in connection with his offer to purchase the site.
93
A letter from A Brewer and J Howard states that they have made formal offers to the selling agents Humberts to purchase the site. These were not formerly declined.
Amended Plan6.1 An amended layout plan has been received in response to the comments
made by neighbours that the proposed car parking spaces would impinge on the right of way. The position of the parking spaces has been adjusted on the plan and this indicates that the right of way would now be unaffected.
Employment land6.2 Policy EM2 seeks to retain land currently or last in employment creating use
unless it is no longer required for employment purposes. This matter was considered by the Planning Inspector in the appeal decision on the previous application RR/2008/517/P. The Inspector’s appeal decision is a material consideration in the determination of the new application.
Previous appeal decision (employment land issue)6.3 Whilst the appeal in respect of RR/2008/517/P was dismissed the Inspector
accepted that the marketing exercise that had been carried out indicated that there would be no justification in requiring that the whole of the site be retained in commercial use. The Inspector pointed to “no indication of a need or desire for any greater amount of employment development from business”. A copy of the appeal decision is attached as a separate APPENDIX DOCUMENT to this report. As previously stated, the Inspector’s comments are a material consideration and normally it would not be necessary to revisit the employment issue; however in this case two local residents have stated that they have offered to purchase the site for commercial use. Any such change in circumstances since the appeal decision is also a material consideration and needs to be investigated accordingly. I have requested further information from the agent on the soundness of these offers, whether they have been accepted or rejected and in the case of the latter, the reason why.
Previous Appeal decision (reason for refusal)6.4 The appeal in respect of RR/2008/517/P was dismissed on the grounds of
layout and design, with the Inspector indicating that any scheme should seek to improve the environment around the principal oak tree and possibly include the creation of a safer pedestrian crossing point. The Inspector also recommended the closure of the Lymden Lane access serving the new development from the Cottenden Road access. In conclusion, he did not consider that the design and layout met the high design standards required by PPS1. Moreover, he considered that the proposed parking spaces opposite the existing cottages (1 and 2 Lymden Lane) would be distinctly un-neighbourly and make the outlook from the front of these cottages much less pleasant than it is now. Finally, the Inspector also concluded that the present
94
attractive rural hedge of the lane would likewise be transformed into one of much more urban, and less attractive, quality.
Layout and Design6.5 The application does not satisfy the Inspector’s recommendations in respect
of the access arrangements; the agent has stated that the closure of the Lymden Lane access and the adaptation of the Cottenden Road access are not achievable. The layout does, however, seek to meet the principles behind the Inspector’s comments by the creation of a courtyard off Lymden Lane, with wrought iron railings, post and rail fencing, landscaping and the creation of public open space around the tree. Moreover, it is noted that the Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposed access arrangements. In the circumstances it is accepted that in terms of overall layout and design, a refusal of planning permission on these grounds would not be justified.
Outlook from Lymden Lane cottages (Forge Cottage and Wayside)6.6 The position of the car parking spaces has been revised and would now no
longer be on land directly opposite the cottages. The rear garden of the proposed detached house would now be in this location. In terms of the relationship between the proposed new dwelling and the existing cottages, it is not considered that there would be a detrimental impact to any material degree that would justify a refusal of planning permission.
Rural hedge adjacent to Lymden Lane6.7 At least in part this appears to be shown on the plans as being removed to
accommodate the proposed detached house, fence and sight lines. I have requested further information in respect of this and in particular, that the agent demonstrates that an appropriate degree of planting would be achieved to protect the character of the lane.
Car parking6.8 The previous application for 4 dwellings and an office/shop proposed the
provision of 12 parking spaces. The Planning Inspector considered this to be in accordance with planning policies and guidelines and sufficient to accommodate the development. The appeal was not, therefore, refused for reasons associated with the proposed level of parking provision. The current proposal contains 12 car parking spaces to serve 3 dwellings and an office/workshop. In the circumstances it is considered that a refusal of planning permission on grounds associated with the demand and impact on parking could not be reasonably substantiated.
Other matters6.9 In notes contained with the Highway Authority’s comments it is recommended
that a £1,500 contribution is requested from the applicant towards a Traffic Regulation Order to prevent vehicles parking on the highway. I have concerns that traffic parking restriction measures (such as yellow lines) would be inappropriate in a rural village environment, however Members will no doubt wish to take their own view on this matter.
95
6.10 In the event that Members are minded to grant planning permission consideration will need to be given to the proposed public land around the tree and whether this could be transferred by Agreement to the Parish Council.
7.1 The previous appeal decision established that a mixed employment/residential use on the site would be acceptable. Further information has been requested in respect of the recent commercial offers that have been made for the site before it can be established whether there has been a change in circumstances that would lead to a requirement to revisit the employment land use issue (Policy EM2).
7.2 In other respect the proposed development has addressed a number of the issues raised by the previous Planning Inspector in respect of the layout and design and the impact on the outlook from neighbouring properties. Further information is, however, required on the proposed treatment of the site frontage in Lymden Lane, particularly the hedgerow.
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT (FULL PLANNING) DELEGATED (FURTHER INFORMATION)___________________________________________________________________
CONDITIONS
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the buildings hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development reflects the character and/or appearance of the existing building and to preserve the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies GD1 (iv) & (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. No development shall take place on any part of the site until the hard landscaping details for that part of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include: a) proposed finished levels or contoursb) means of enclosure
96
c) vehicle access and pedestrian access and footways and circulation areasd) hard surfacing materialsReason: To enhance the appearance of the development in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
4. No development shall take place on any part of the site until the soft landscaping details [for that part of the site] have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority, which shall include:a) indications of all existing hedgerows and trees on the land including details
of those to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development.
b) planting plans;c) schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed
numbers/densities where appropriated) implementation programmeReason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
5. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority. Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan
6. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of measures for the protection of trees in the course of development. This shall include details of any ground protection measures and the positioning and design of protective barriers which should be in accordance with BS5837 2005. The position of the protective barriers and protective measures should be plotted on a plan. Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan
7. The erection of protection measures shall be undertaken before any equipment, machinery, or materials are brought on to the site for the purposes of development and shall be maintained until all equipment; machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed in any area fenced and the ground areas within these areas shall not be altered, nor shall excavation be made, without the written consent of this authority. Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan
97
8. No development shall take place until full details of the hard landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include any special engineering required to accommodate the protection of trees in relation to hard surfaces within root protection areas, the details of the working methods to be employed for the installation of drives and paths within the root protection areas of retained trees. Hard surfaces shall be of a no dig construction using a 3 dimensional confinement system.Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan
9. No development shall take place until full details of the working methods to be employed for the demolition of buildings and structures, within or adjacent to the root protection areas of retained trees, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These works shall be carried out as approved. The details shall include the specification that any excavations that take place within the root protection areas should be carried out by hand. Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan
10. No works or development shall take place until a scheme of supervision for the arboricultural protection measures has been approved in writing by the local planning authority. This scheme will be appropriate to the scale and duration of the works and may include details of:a. induction and personnel awareness of arboricultural matters. b. identification of individual responsibilities and key personnel. c. timing and methods of site visiting and record keeping, including updates. d. procedures for dealing with variations and incidents. Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and to safeguard the characteristics of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan
11. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a plan indicating the positions, design, height, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The boundary treatment shall be completed before the buildings are occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
12. At the time of construction and prior to the first occupation or use of the detached house hereby approved, the bathroom windows at first floor level within the north east elevations, as indicated on the approved drawing no. 513/113 (Redrawn), date stamped 2 October 2009, shall be glazed with obscure glass of obscurity level equivalent to scale 5 on the Pilkington Glass Scale and shall thereafter be retained in that condition.
98
Reason: To preserve the residential amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1 (ii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
13. Prior to the last dwelling being occupied the office/workshop building shall have been completed and available for occupation by a business user.Reason: To ensure that the business component of the mixed use development is provided in accordance with policy EM2 of the Rother District Local Plan.
14. The altered access shall be in the position shown on the submitted plan (number 513/111) and laid out and constructed in accordance with the attached HT407 diagram and all works undertaken shall be executed and completed in accordance with the approved details before any of the buildings are occupied. Reason: In the interests of road safety and to accord with the requirements of the Director of Transport and Environment of East Sussex in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan. Note: To give effect to this condition you should contact the Transport and Environment Department of East Sussex County Council at Sidley Depot, Ninfield Road, Bexhill TN39 5AA (Telephone 0845 6080193) prior to the commencement of work and enter a Private Works agreement between yourself and the County Council.
15. No building shall be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plan drawing no. 513/111 revision B date stamped 5 November 2009 for 12 number of cars to be parked and it shall thereafter be retained for those purposes only.Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or conditions of general safety along the highway in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
16. During any form of earthworks and/or excavations that are carried out as part of the development, suitable wheel washing equipment should be provided within the site.Reason: To prevent contamination and damage to the adjacent roads, in the interests of highway safety and for the convenience of the public at large, in accordance with Policy GD1 of the Rother District Local Plan.
17. Before any construction work is commenced, a schedule of floor levels for each dwelling and the workshop/office building, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.Reason: To ensure the satisfactory development of the site in accordance with Policy GD1(iv) (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
18. Before occupation of the buildings hereby permitted commences, details of the siting and form of bins for the storage and recycling of refuse within the site (internally or externally), and a collection point, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the approved details
99
shall be implemented and thereafter continued, with all bins and containers available for use, maintained and replaced as need be.Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the locality and also, in the interests of providing a sustainable development in accordance with Policy GD1(ii), (iv) of the Rother District Local Plan and PPS1, paragraph 20.
Note: This decision notice relates to the proposals as shown on the originally submitted plans and subsequently amended site layout plan (drawing number 513/111 Revision B date stamped 5 November 2009.
REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: The planning inspector’s comments in respect of the appeal decision on the previous planning application (reference RR/2008/517/P) are a material consideration in the determination of the current application. The decision letter established that in the circumstances evident at that time, the principle of a mixed employment/residential use would be acceptable. The details of the scheme, in terms of the layout, scale, design, external appearance, access and car parking provision are also considered satisfactory. The application accords with Policies GD1 (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) and EM2 of the Rother District Local Plan.
2.1 This application relates to an unoccupied dwelling situated on the south side of Poppinghole Lane between Poppinghole Farm and Poppinghole Farm Cottages. The existing dwelling is sited close to the road frontage.
2.2 The site straddles the Sedlescombe and Mountfield Parish boundary and is adjacent to the boundary of Salehurst/Robertsbridge Parishes.
4.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing house and to construct a replacement dwelling further from the lane and to erect a detached 3 car open frontage garage on part of the footprint of the demolished dwelling. A new vehicular access is proposed; this is a common element with application RR/2009/2433/P reported separately to this Committee.
4.2 The proposed dwelling has been designed to reflect the character of a converted barn incorporating dark stained weatherboarding, natural slates and a catslide roof. The floor plan is however complex unlike most barn conversions. A four bedroomed layout is achieved at first floor with more extensive ground floor accommodation comprising: kitchen, family room, sitting room, dining room, utility and boot room.
5.1 Sedlescombe Parish Council:- Support Approval.
5.2 Highway Authority:- Comments awaited.
5.3 Natural England:- Supports recommendations set out in section 8 of the Ecology report accompanying the application. A protected species licence will be necessary prior to any works to the building.
5.4 Planning Notice:- No representations received.___________________________________________________________________
6.0 APPRAISAL
6.1 Replacement dwelling
6.1.1 The principle of a one for one replacement dwelling accords with Policy HG10 and in terms of Policy GD1 the scheme is considered satisfactory. The size of the proposed dwelling exceeds the floor area of the original by about 50%. I do however note that the existing has never been extended; for this reason and the fact that the siting is less prominent from the highway, I believe the size increase to be acceptable. The present property is suffering from subsidence.
6.1.2 The weather boarded design with catslide roofs suits the location close to other traditional structures, and is considered appropriate for its rural location. The palette of materials is taken from those found close by.
104
6.2 Siting
6.2.1 Reference to older Ordnance Survey maps suggests that the curtilage of the original farmhouse was smaller (less deep) than the red site area now indicated. Indeed the siting of the new house lies outside of the apparent historic curtilage: this would be contrary to Policy HG10.
6.2.2 The application is however accompanied by two letters from local residents clearly stating that the curtilage has been as now indicated for many years. One writer confirms that it has been so for 30 years or more confirming that he mowed the lawns. The other confirms knowledge of same having erected fencing to prevent livestock straying onto the lawns.
6.2.3 I would normally advise that the correct procedure to follow would be an application for a Certificate of Lawful Use. However, given the available evidence, there is in my view no merit in insisting that such an intermediary step be required in this instance. I am content that the red site area be taken as an agreed curtilage and thus accept is in compliance with Policy HG10.
6.3 Access
6.3.1 The proposal includes a new vehicular access. This is the same access that is proposed by RR/2009/2433/P reported separately. The new access would serve both development proposals; an existing access point to the west, outside of the ‘red’ site, would be closed off.
6.3.2 I am awaiting the formal response of the Highway Authority but I have discussed the proposal and do not expect an objection to be raised. I would expect highway conditions to be recommended.
6.4 Bats
6.4.1 The application is accompanied by an Ecological report; this identifies evidence of a past maternity roost of Brown Long-eared bats within the roofspace. Infra-red video also indicates a small number of bats present between the roofing felt and the roofing slates.
6.4.2 The existing dwelling has structurally failed and the only economical solution is judged to be replacement of the house. This scenario may be accepted as reason for Natural England to issue a protected species licence; this legislation is independent of the planning system.
6.4.3 It is my understanding that Natural England are not raising any objection to the grant of planning permission but wish to ensure that the applicant is alerted to the need to obtain a European Protected Species Licence. Without this licence a planning permission could not be implemented.
105
6.5 Garage
6.5.1 The proposed garage building would be visible from the road because of the access adjacent which involves excavation below the level of the garage. The design of the building, however, with a fully hipped plain tiled roof and stained weather boarding, reflects that of many small byre/cowshed type structures commonly seen in the countryside.
6.6 Section 106 Agreement
6.6.1 The proposed siting is to the south of the footprint of the dwelling to be demolished. It will therefore be necessary to require the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to extinguish rights to rebuild on the old siting and to ensure that compensation rights are removed.
6.7 Refuse and recycling
6.7.1 There is ample space within the curtilage for bins to be stored out of public view. I believe the provision of a collection point for the house and any development permitted under reference RR/2009/2433/P, served by the common access to be best achieved by planning conditions in this instance.
7.1 I am satisfied that the proposal accords with Policies GD1 and HG10 being of a suitable scale and design within the established curtilage without unacceptable neighbour or landscape effects. The need for a safe access with on site turning and parking is satisfied.
7.2 The necessary additional details of levels, exact external materials, landscaping, tree retention and refuse/recycling provision are all matters that can properly be dealt with by the imposition of appropriate conditions.
7.3 A Section 106 Agreement is required to ensure the demolition of the existing house and to extinguish rights to rebuild on the same site.
7.4 A European Protected Species Licence will be required to be sought from Natural England.
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
106
Reason: In accordance with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. No development in respect of the dwelling hereby approved shall commence until details for the landscaping of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall include: a) Indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land including details
of those to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development and
b) A planting plan with schedule of plants/trees, noting species, plant sizes and positions
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the appearance of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv)(v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the appearance of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv)(v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
4. Before occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted commences, details of the siting and form of bins for the storage and recycling of refuse within the site (internally or externally), and a collection point, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the approved details shall be implemented and thereafter continued, with all bins and containers available for use, maintained and replaced as need be.Reason: In the interests of providing a sustainable development in accordance with Policy GD1(ii)(iv) of the Rother District Local Plan and PPS1, paragraph 20.
5. The garage hereby approved shall be used for domestic garaging and garden storage only, and for no habitable accommodation or other purpose including any other purpose in Class C3 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that Order.Reason: To provide adequate on site parking facilities that do not prejudice the free flow of traffic and conditions of general safety along the highway and to protect the amenities of the local area, in accordance with Policies GD1(i)(iii) and TR3 of the Rother District Local Plan.
6. No development shall take place until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
107
Reason: To ensure that the development reflects the character and/or appearance of the existing building and to preserve the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies GD1(iv)(v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
7. Highway conditions as may be recommended by the Highway Authority.
8. No development shall commence, including any demolition, until a European Protected Species Licence has been obtained form Natural England and a copy provided to the local planning authority together with full details of mitigation measures required by the licence and agreed by Natural England. The development shall be undertaken in compliance with the said licence and the required mitigation measures.Reason: In the interests of safeguarding protected wildlife and their habitats identified by EU and UK Wildlife Protection Legislation and the UK Biodiversity Action Plan in accordance with Policy GD1(vii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
Notes:i) This permission is the subject of an obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act 1990.ii) This planning permission does not authorise any interference with animals,
birds, marine life, plants, fauna and habitats in contravention of the requirements of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW) and other legislation. Further advice on the requirements of these Acts is available from Natural England, Sussex and Surrey Team, Phoenix House, 33 North Street, Lewes, East Sussex BN7 2PH.
iii) The applicant is reminded that it is an offence to damage or destroy species protected under separate legislation. Planning permission for a development does not provide a defence against prosecution under European and UK wildlife protection legislation. Separate licences and consents may be required to undertake work on the site where protected species are found and these should be sought before development commences.
iv) This permission includes condition(s) requiring the submission of details prior to the commencement of development. Following close consideration in the courts, it is now well established that if the permission contains conditions requiring further details to be submitted to the Council or other matters to take place prior to development commencing and these conditions have not been complied with, the development is unlawful and does not have planning permission. You are therefore strongly advised to ensure that all such conditions have been complied with before the development is commenced.
REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: The replacement of an existing dwelling on a one for one basis within the established curtilage is in compliance with Policy HG10 of the Rother District Local Plan. The proposed development is considered to be of an appropriate scale and design which relates satisfactorily with nearby properties and does not harm the character and appearance of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The proposal is considered to be in compliance with Policy GD1 of the Rother District Local Plan and subject to conditions acceptable.
Planning Committee 19 November 2009___________________________________________________________________
RR/2009/2433/P SEDLESCOMBE/MOUNTFIELD Poppinghole Farm,Poppinghole Lane
Conversion of redundant agricultural building to holiday let units, erection of new garage with first floor holiday let unit, erection of indoor swimming pool, erection of stables, new access and associated landscape works.
Case Officer: Mr Andy Rowland (Tel: 01424 787612)(Email: [email protected])
Parish: SEDLESCOMBE/MOUNTFIELD
Ward Member: Councillor T Ganly
Reason for Committee consideration: Head of Planning
Statutory 8 week date: 26 November 2009 ___________________________________________________________________
This application is included in the list of site inspections.___________________________________________________________________
1.0 POLICIES
1.1 South East Plan
1.1.1 Policy C3 (AONB)
“...In considering proposals for development, the emphasis should be on small-scale proposals that are sustainably located and designed. Proposals which support the economies and social well being of the AONBs and their communities, including affordable housing schemes, will be encouraged provided that they do not conflict with the aim of conserving and enhancing natural beauty.”
“Opportunities to promote tourism and recreation-based rural diversification should be encouraged where they provide jobs for local residents and are of a sale and type appropriate to their location.
Local planning authorities in formulating planning policies and taking decisions will:
i. support proposals which seek to develop the tourism opportunities associated with all types of rural development initiatives...”
1.2 Rother Local Plan
1.2.1 The following Local Plan policies are relevant to this proposal: GD1, DS1 (vi) and (ix), DS2(vi), EM3, EM7 and EM11.
1.2.2 Specifically Policy EM7 states:
“Proposals for new or extended tourist attractions or visitors facilities will be .permitted where they accord with Policies DS1 and GD1. In the countryside outside development boundaries, if the development is not clearly ancillary to an existing visitor facility or tourist attraction, it will be necessary to demonstrate that a countryside location is necessary.”
2.1 Poppinghole Farm lies on the south side of Poppinghole Lane. Poppinghole Oast lies to the west and is occupied by the applicant. There are also two existing holiday let cottages, garaging and stabling between the oast and the application site within the same ownership. To the east is the original Poppinghole Farmhouse which is the subject of a separate report to this Committee reference RR/2009/2379/P.
2.2 Land to the south within the applicant’s ownership includes a manège, modern barn and paddocks adjoining fern wood (ancient) where it is understood safe hacking is available. The applicants land ownership also includes two lakes for fishing.
3.1 RR/92/1872/P Change of use and conversion of Oasthouse to dwelling – Approved Conditional
3.2 RR/93/647/P C/U barn to annexe/holiday unit – Approved Conditional
3.3 RR/95/1079/P Conversion of storage area to holiday let – Refused – Appeal Dismissed
111
3.4 RR/2000/2350/P C/U barn to stables – Approved.
3.5 RR/2000/2564/P Conversion of byre to stables – Approved.
3.6 RR/2000/2598/P Construction of manège – Approved Conditional
3.7 RR/2001/1303/P Agricultural barn - Approved___________________________________________________________________
4.0 PROPOSAL
4.1 Planning permission is sought for the conversion of the roadside range of single storey buildings into three holiday units, two four person units and one two person unit. This building is referred to by the applicant’s agent as the north range but by the Ecologist as the former milking parlour.
4.2 A detached building of traditional materials and design is proposed on the east side of the courtyard comprising open fronted garaging on the ground level with a two bedroomed holiday flat above. The design incorporates half dormers and a modest balcony.
4.3 On the south side of the courtyard a single storey new building is proposed to contain a swimming pool, spa, splash pool and WCs and shower. This building would link with the existing range on the west side of the courtyard which contains the existing holiday lets/annexe.
4.4 A consistency of materials comprising stock bricks, slate and dark stained weatherboarding seeks to give unity to the overall scheme.
4.5 An additional stable barn measuring 20m by 12m accommodating 8 stable boxes together with storage for tack/rugs, washdown etc is proposed between the courtyard development described above and the existing barn and manège to the south. This building would be steel framed with blockwork infill and profile sheeting to the gables and roof.
4.6 The application is accompanied by a comprehensive business plan the executive summary of which is attached to this report as a separate APPENDIX DOCUMENT. The applicant is seeking to establish a specialist holiday destination primarily to horse riders where visitors may, if they wish, bring their own horses. In this case access to riding does not have to involve using the lane which is narrow. This, together with on site fishing, is expected to facilitate all year round attraction to visitors.
5.1 Sedlescombe Parish Council:- Support the proposal because1) Good quality year round tourism should benefit local economy2) Environment friendly approach is welcomed3) Although Poppinghole Lane is narrow little traffic generation is expected
112
4) The Parish has been assured that the stables and holiday lets will be run as a single business.
5.2 Highway Authority:- Recommends conditions regarding:a) Position and construction of new accessb) Closure of existing accessc) The provision of on site parkingd) The provision of on site turninge) The use of wheel washing equipment during any earthworks/excavation
period of the development
5.3 Head of Environmental Health:- Recommends the imposition of the standard contaminated land condition.
5.4 Natural England:- The applicant’s Ecological Surveyor confirms bats within the milking parlour. Natural England supports the Ecologist’s recommendations for mitigation. A European Protected Species Licence will be required.
5.5 Head of Regeneration:- Comments awaited.
5.6 Environment Agency:- Comments awaited.
5.7 Planning Notice:- No representations received.___________________________________________________________________
6.0 APPRAISAL
6.1 Conversions
6.1.1 The milking parlour range forms the north side of the courtyard and I am satisfied that that part forming the two four person units is capable of conversion without the need for substantial reconstruction. A tourism use accords with the advice of PPS7 and Local Plan policy EM3. The smaller unit at the eastern end of the range will require more reconstruction and the reinstatement of part of the rear wall since the existing access to the yard is through this part of the structure. The continuity of a building on this side of the courtyard is important from both aesthetic and security viewpoints.
6.2 New build elects
6.2.1 The open fronted garaging with holiday flat over and the swimming pool building are new buildings in the countryside that generally would not normally be accepted without specific justifications. I am mindful that the objective of this proposal is to develop a high class tourist destination; the business plan supports the project.
6.2.2 Policy TSR2 of the South East Plan requires Local Authorities making decisions in rural areas to support proposals which seek to develop tourism opportunities associated with development initiatives. Similarly, Local Plan
113
policy EM7 (at para 1.2.2. above) supports such tourism proposal that is either ancillary to an existing facility or where it can be demonstrated that a countryside location is necessary. This site already has two units of accommodation for tourists (one currently used as an annexe) and clearly an equestrian establishment needs to be in the countryside. Moreover, it is most desirable to link conveniently to riding off the public highway which this proposal does.
6.2.3 The proposed stable barn is new build and is primarily proposed in anticipation of the need arising from the tourist uses either to house horses provided or those brought by visitors. It is considered to be an integral part of the ‘package’ of proposals. It is sited conveniently for the use of the manège and onward to woodland hacking.
6.3 Landscape
6.3.1 The site is situated within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty but I do not believe the landscape impact to be unacceptable. The design of the new buildings and the character of the existing ones combine to form a pleasing group in the local roadside landscape. In the wider landscape the whole group is well assimilated and is not prominent in its low lying well treed location.
6.4 Highway issues
6.4.1 Poppinghole Lane is narrow and twisty but the Highway Authority is satisfied that the level of traffic generation will be low. The new access will become the primary one for the site and a sub-standard access will be closed. The bell mouth will of course give a good passing place in the lane. The horse riding activities are not generally expected to add to riding on the highway.
6.4.2 The submitted block plan shows all necessary parking and turning that the recommended highway conditions demand.
6.5 Protected species
6.5.1 The application is accompanied by an Ecological report. This did not reveal the presence of owls but evidence of both Pipistrelle and Long Eared bat roosts were found within the milking parlour range. A European Protected Species Licence will be required prior to any work being undertaken to the building. Natural England have supported the mitigation measures set out in the Ecologist’s report. Nevertheless, it will be necessary for the applicant to seek the necessary licence from Natural England.
6.5.2 Notwithstanding the desirability from a planning perspective to require landscaping of the development, the Ecologist has also provided details of trees/shrubs etc that are considered beneficial to the wellbeing of bats. The level of any external lighting also needs regulation by condition for both planning and bat welfare reasons.
114
6.6 Waste and Recycling
6.6.1 The submitted plan does not indicate provision for storage and collection of bins for waste and recycling. There is however ample opportunity for such provision; I am therefore content for this to be the subject of a condition requiring details to be provided.
6.7 Section 106 Agreement
6.7.1 There are matters that should be the subject of a legal agreement. I would not wish to see units of accommodation sold off separately thereby diluting the economic benefit of a turnover of tourist occupiers and I would therefore suggest that the development should be tied together and linked to a dwelling for management purposes. It is also desirable to regulate the period that any one person may reside in the holiday units each year.
7.1 The design and layout of the proposed buildings together with the general palates of materials is considered to be acceptable forming a pleasing group of buildings in the local landscape.
7.2 The additional new build structures are considered to have been adequately justified in support of a development that is desirable in a countryside location. The scheme provides diversification, employment potential and economic benefits to the rural part of the District.
7.3 There is no highway objection raised but conditions are required to ensure the indicated parking facilities are provided at the time of development.
7.4 The presence of two protected species of bats is not seen as an obstruction to the grant of planning permission because other, protected species, legislation is effective in its regulation. I would propose both a condition and notes alerting the applicant to the need to obtain the appropriate licence before undertaking any development.
7.5 The overall scheme is considered to accord with the policies outlined in section 1.0 of this report subject to conditions relating to materials, highway issues, external lighting, waste and recycling, use, protected species and landscaping.
7.6 A Section 106 Obligation is considered desirable to prevent sub-division of ownership and to regulate occupancy/use.
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT (FULL PLANNING) DELEGATED (EXPIRY OF STATUTORY CONSULTATION AND SECTION 106 OBLIGATION)___________________________________________________________________
115
CONDITIONS
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification), no extensions, as defined within classes A or D of Part 1 of the Schedule 2 of the order, shall be carried out on the site otherwise than in accordance with a planning permission granted by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the satisfactory appearance of the development and locality is maintained and to preserve the natural landscape quality and character of the High Weald AONB in accordance with Policy GD1 (iv & v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
3. The holiday lets are to be occupied for holiday purposes only and shall not be occupied as a person’s sole or main place of residence.Reason: To ensure that approved holiday accommodation is not used for unauthorised permanent residential occupation in accordance with Policies EM11 and HG10 of the Rother District Local Plan and Government guidance within Annexe B of the ‘Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism’.
4. The owners/operators shall maintain an up-to-date register of the names of all owners and/or occupiers of the holiday let on the site, and of their main home addresses, and shall make this information available at all reasonable times to the local planning authority.Reason: To ensure that approved holiday accommodation is not used for unauthorised permanent residential occupation in accordance with Policies EM11 and HG10 of the Rother District Local Plan and Government guidance within Annexe B of the ‘Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism’.
5. The proposed holiday unit(s) shall not be occupied for more than 56 days in total in any calendar year by any one person. Reason: To ensure that approved holiday accommodation is not used for unauthorised permanent residential occupation in accordance with Policy EM11 of the Rother District Local Plan and Government guidance within the ‘Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism’.
6. No development shall commence until details for the landscaping of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall include: a) Indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land including details
of those to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development and
b) A planting plan with schedule of plants/trees, noting species, plant sizes and positions
116
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the appearance of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv & v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
7. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the appearance of the locality in accordance with Policy GD1(iv & v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
8. Before occupation of any of the holiday units hereby permitted commences, details of the siting and form of bins for the storage and recycling of refuse within the site (internally or externally), and a collection point, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the approved details shall be implemented and thereafter continued, with all bins and containers available for use, maintained and replaced as need be.Reason: In the interests of providing a sustainable development in accordance with Policy GD1(ii), (iv) of the Rother District Local Plan and PPS1, paragraph 20.
9. The garaging hereby approved shall be used for domestic garaging and garden storage only, and for no habitable accommodation or other purpose including any other purpose in Class C3 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that Order.Reason: To provide adequate on site parking facilities that do not prejudice the free flow of traffic and conditions of general safety along the highway and to protect the amenities of the local area, in accordance with Policies GD1 (i) (iii) and TR3 of the Rother District Local Plan.
10. No development shall take place until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the buildings hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development reflects the character and/or appearance of the existing building and to preserve the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies GD1 (iv) & (v) of the Rother District Local Plan.
11. The new access shall be in the position shown on the submitted plan [number 0908/SP1] and laid out and constructed in accordance with the attached HT407 diagram and all works undertaken shall be executed and completed by the applicant to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of road safety and to accord with the requirements of the Director of Transport and Environment of East Sussex in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
117
12. The building shall not be occupied until the existing access shown on the submitted plan has been stopped up and the kerb and/or footway and/or verge reinstated in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of road safety and to accord with the requirements of the Director of Transport and Environment of East Sussex in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
13. The development shall not be occupied until parking areas have been provided in accordance with the approved plans and the areas shall thereafter be retained for that use and shall not be used other than for the parking of motor vehicles.Reason: In the interests of road safety and to accord with the requirements of the Director of Transport and Environment of East Sussex in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
14. The development shall not be occupied until a turning space for vehicles has been provided and constructed in accordance with the approved plans and the turning space shall thereafter be retained for that use and shall not be used for any other purpose.Reason: In the interests of road safety and to accord with the requirements of the Director of Transport and Environment of East Sussex in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
15. During any form of earthworks and/or excavations that are carried out as part of the development, suitable vehicle wheel washing equipment should be provided within the site, to the approval of the Planning Authority, to prevent contamination and damage to the adjacent roads.Reason: In the interests of road safety and to accord with the requirements of the Director of Transport and Environment of East Sussex in accordance with Policy GD1(iii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
16. Details of any floodlighting or external illumination shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the buildings are occupied. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and no other lighting shall be installed. Reason: To safeguard the visual/rural/residential amenities of the locality and to control overspill and light pollution in accordance with Policy GD1 (ii) & (iv) of the Rother District Local Plan.
17. No development shall commence, including any demolition, until a European Protected Species Licence has been obtained form Natural England and a copy provided to the local planning authority together with full details of mitigation measures required by the licence and agreed by Natural England. The development shall be undertaken in compliance with the said licence and the required mitigation measures.Reason: In the interests of safeguarding protected wildlife and their habitats identified by EU and UK Wildlife Protection Legislation and the UK Biodiversity Action Plan in accordance with Policy GD1(vii) of the Rother District Local Plan.
118
Notes:i) This permission is the subject of an obligation under Section 106 of the Town
and Country Planning Act 1990.ii) This planning permission does not authorise any interference with animals,
birds, marine life, plants, fauna and habitats in contravention of the requirements of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW) and other legislation. Further advice on the requirements of these Acts is available from Natural England, Sussex and Surrey Team, Phoenix House, 33 North Street, Lewes, East Sussex BN7 2PH.
iii) The applicant is reminded that it is an offence to damage or destroy species protected under separate legislation. Planning permission for a development does not provide a defence against prosecution under European and UK wildlife protection legislation. Separate licences and consents may be required to undertake work on the site where protected species are found and these should be sought before development commences.
iv) This permission includes condition(s) requiring the submission of details prior to the commencement of development. Following close consideration in the courts, it is now well established that if the permission contains conditions requiring further details to be submitted to the Council or other matters to take place prior to development commencing and these conditions have not been complied with, the development is unlawful and does not have planning permission. You are therefore strongly advised to ensure that all such conditions have been complied with before the development is commenced.
v) To give effect to condition No10 you should contact the Transport and Environment Department of East Sussex County Council at Sidley Depot, Ninfield Road, Bexhill TN39 5AA (Telephone 0845 6080193) prior to the commencement of work and enter a Private Works agreement between yourself and the County Council.
REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION: It is considered that the proposed scheme should be supported as the development of a tourism enterprise that needs to be in a countryside location and which has been demonstrated to be of a suitable scale and appropriately located so as not to cause unacceptable or undesirable effect upon the character and appearance of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The development is judged to relate satisfactorily to the locality and nearby properties and to accord with Policies C3 and TSR2 of the South East Plan and Policies GD1, DS1(vi)(ix), DS2(vi), EM3 and EM7 of the Rother District Local Plan.
